Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.

What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.

Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.

Download on the App Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Off-Topic discussion about Bitcoin and cryptocurrency.

1…4041434546…49

Comments

  • richardyotrichardyot

  • NeuMNeuM

    @richardyot said:

    Haha. What are organizations, anyway? People. When people start promoting their own wrong ideas, then the organization and their mission changes to serve their interests.

  • richardyotrichardyot

    I admit I'm not following the intricacies of Libertarian factionalism. I'm sure it's all very entertaining though.

    I'll make a note to add the Cato Institute into my binder labelled "Too Woke, Avoid".

  • PZooPZoo

    Interesting move by El Salvador to help them rise further through the ranks of drug trafficking meccas. Offshore drug trade related payments made in Bitcoin to onshore suppliers and personnel, who spend at merchants who convert with government into USD, and government sells the Bitcoin for USD. Money laundering complete. Too bad for them that the global financial authorities and security agencies are throwing their full coordinated resources into piercing the veil of secrecy on ownership. But if this actually works, they will probably see covert or actual military action against them.

    Bitcoin still a fail on every claimed value proposition except as a day trading game for chart readers.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    @richardyot said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    You just proved my point. You don’t see it because you (I’m using “you” in a general sense) may actually be the beneficiary of profligate spending, misallocated resources, corruption and waste.

    He's from the UK. That kind of thing never happens there. ;)

    I don't recall ever claiming the UK or US systems to be perfect and beyond criticism. What I have done is to make measured economic arguments in favour of government spending. That doesn't mean I then have to defend every idiotic decision ever made by a government in the course of history, or that I think states are beyond criticism.

    I can make a general argument in favour of state intervention or government spending and still criticise specific implementations on a case-by-case basis, it's not an all or nothing proposition.

    Sorry man, it was a joke. I didn't mean it to be taken as an attack on your positions, but as a light-hearted dig at politicians in general.

    Yes, I'm deeply distrustful of politicians in general. But also it clear that messy though it may be, for the most part, democracy limps along, and is the best thing we have.

    I need to keep in mind that people don't realize I'm ambivalent on whether Bitcoin and/or any of the recent developments are good or not. I'm not ever actually arguing for one side or the other over the general topic, but I do render opinions of individual events and ideas as I see them based on the information and understanding I have at the time. Your posts are excellent fodder for helping make up my mind. (Not that I agree with some of them in the end though.)

    You and I do sometimes see the same developments quite differently that's for sure. But I actually appreciate the balance you bring to my tendency to be over optimistic on the subject.

  • richardyotrichardyot

    @wim said:

    @richardyot said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    You just proved my point. You don’t see it because you (I’m using “you” in a general sense) may actually be the beneficiary of profligate spending, misallocated resources, corruption and waste.

    He's from the UK. That kind of thing never happens there. ;)

    I don't recall ever claiming the UK or US systems to be perfect and beyond criticism. What I have done is to make measured economic arguments in favour of government spending. That doesn't mean I then have to defend every idiotic decision ever made by a government in the course of history, or that I think states are beyond criticism.

    I can make a general argument in favour of state intervention or government spending and still criticise specific implementations on a case-by-case basis, it's not an all or nothing proposition.

    Sorry man, it was a joke. I didn't mean it to be taken as an attack on your positions, but as a light-hearted dig at politicians in general.

    Yes, I'm deeply distrustful of politicians in general. But also it clear that messy though it may be, for the most part, democracy limps along, and is the best thing we have.

    I guess I need to keep in mind that people don't realize I'm ambivalent on whether Bitcoin and/or any of the recent developments are good or not. You and I do sometimes see the same developments quite differently, though, that's for sure. But I actually appreciate the balance you bring to my tendency to be over optimistic on the subject.

    Yeah it's all good. And yes politicians suck, right now in the UK there's literally no-one I want to vote for.

  • wimwim

    On the subject of El Salvadore. The context is important here. Government in El Salvador cannot be put in the same context of US and European democracies. > @richardyot said:

    @wim said:

    @richardyot said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    You just proved my point. You don’t see it because you (I’m using “you” in a general sense) may actually be the beneficiary of profligate spending, misallocated resources, corruption and waste.

    He's from the UK. That kind of thing never happens there. ;)

    I don't recall ever claiming the UK or US systems to be perfect and beyond criticism. What I have done is to make measured economic arguments in favour of government spending. That doesn't mean I then have to defend every idiotic decision ever made by a government in the course of history, or that I think states are beyond criticism.

    I can make a general argument in favour of state intervention or government spending and still criticise specific implementations on a case-by-case basis, it's not an all or nothing proposition.

    Sorry man, it was a joke. I didn't mean it to be taken as an attack on your positions, but as a light-hearted dig at politicians in general.

    Yes, I'm deeply distrustful of politicians in general. But also it clear that messy though it may be, for the most part, democracy limps along, and is the best thing we have.

    I guess I need to keep in mind that people don't realize I'm ambivalent on whether Bitcoin and/or any of the recent developments are good or not. You and I do sometimes see the same developments quite differently, though, that's for sure. But I actually appreciate the balance you bring to my tendency to be over optimistic on the subject.

    Yeah it's all good. And yes politicians suck, right now in the UK there's literally no-one I want to vote for.

    Sadly, I'm disaffected with both parties in my country as well.

  • NeuMNeuM
    edited June 2021

    @wim said:

    @richardyot said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    You just proved my point. You don’t see it because you (I’m using “you” in a general sense) may actually be the beneficiary of profligate spending, misallocated resources, corruption and waste.

    He's from the UK. That kind of thing never happens there. ;)

    I don't recall ever claiming the UK or US systems to be perfect and beyond criticism. What I have done is to make measured economic arguments in favour of government spending. That doesn't mean I then have to defend every idiotic decision ever made by a government in the course of history, or that I think states are beyond criticism.

    I can make a general argument in favour of state intervention or government spending and still criticise specific implementations on a case-by-case basis, it's not an all or nothing proposition.

    Sorry man, it was a joke. I didn't mean it to be taken as an attack on your positions, but as a light-hearted dig at politicians in general.

    Yes, I'm deeply distrustful of politicians in general. But also it clear that messy though it may be, for the most part, democracy limps along, and is the best thing we have.

    I need to keep in mind that people don't realize I'm ambivalent on whether Bitcoin and/or any of the recent developments are good or not. I'm not ever actually arguing for one side or the other over the general topic, but I do render opinions of individual events and ideas as I see them based on the information and understanding I have at the time. Your posts are excellent fodder for helping make up my mind. (Not that I agree with some of them in the end though.)

    You and I do sometimes see the same developments quite differently that's for sure. But I actually appreciate the balance you bring to my tendency to be over optimistic on the subject.

    The only reason the use of Bitcoin as currency is important there is because it is the first. And I understand Ecuador is also looking into it. It will continue to spread and become part of the economic landscape and it has already started.

    Also, the hashtags #BitcoinVolcano and #VolcanoEnergy are pretty cool.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    Regarding El Salvador. It's a mistake to analyze the actions there in the light of US and European democracy. By Central American standards this is far from a draconian measure. I hope anyone who lived in the 80's remembers the horrific revolution, and the terrible atrocities committed in equal parts by the revolutionaries and the government. This is a country where violent upheaval, repressive government, confiscation of property, and instability has been a way of life for decades.

    What I think I see here is the president made a proposal that was voted on and adopted by the legislature of this country in a democratic fashion. I assume (but don't know) that they have the authority to enact a measure of this type granted by El Salvador's constitution. I also always assumed it is the prerogative of governments to decide what the functional currencies of their countries should be.

    I'm not seeing the problem here from a governmental aspect. There are plenty of reasons to fear over-authoritarian government in El Salvador right now, but does this really fall into that category?

    Whether or not it's a positive or negative development, I honestly don't know. I will say that I see compelling reasons why they might want to try this.

    First, their economy is hugely dependent on remittances from the US and other countries, but a large percentage of the population has no access to banks. This has the potential to make that process easier, safer, and less expensive, thus encouraging more inflow to the economy.

    Second, this has already been beneficial to the economy and wellbeing of two geographically separated towns who adopted Bitcoin into their economies. I'm guessing that the politicians took note and the altruist in me wants to think that they were inspired to try to spread that success. The cynic says that they saw something that could have the potential to spread on its own and they wanted to get in front of it to stay in control.

    Either way, this is an interesting thing to watch.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    @ervin said:
    Well, I have to admit dendy has consistently come out against the enslavement of people and against scheming states and overreaching governments forcing people to do things. His condemnation of this textbook government abomination should be out any minute now, surely.

    I'm interested in why you think this is a "textbook government abomination". I always assumed it is the right and duty of States to set policy regarding legal currencies in their countries. Does the EU adopting the Euro fall into that category? The US changing from the gold standard? Etc?

    Sincere question. I'm not trying to argue. I'm trying to learn.

  • richardyotrichardyot
    edited June 2021

    @wim said:
    Regarding El Salvador. It's a mistake to analyze the actions there in the light of US and European democracy. By Central American standards this is far from a draconian measure. I hope anyone who lived in the 80's remembers the horrific revolution, and the terrible atrocities committed in equal parts by the revolutionaries and the government. This is a country where violent upheaval, repressive government, confiscation of property, and instability has been a way of life for decades.

    What I think I see here is the president made a proposal that was voted on and adopted by the legislature of this country in a democratic fashion. I assume (but don't know) that they have the authority to enact a measure of this type granted by El Salvador's constitution. I also always assumed it is the prerogative of governments to decide what the functional currencies of their countries should be.

    I'm not seeing the problem here from a governmental aspect. There are plenty of reasons to fear over-authoritarian government in El Salvador right now, but does this really fall into that category?

    Whether or not it's a positive or negative development, I honestly don't know. I will say that I see compelling reasons why they might want to try this.

    First, their economy is hugely dependent on remittances from the US and other countries, but a large percentage of the population has no access to banks. This has the potential to make that process easier, safer, and less expensive, thus encouraging more inflow to the economy.

    Second, this has already been beneficial to the economy and wellbeing of two geographically separated towns who adopted Bitcoin into their economies. I'm guessing that the politicians took note and the altruist in me wants to think that they were inspired by the success there to try to spread that success. The cynic says that they saw something that could have the potential to spread on its own and they wanted to get in front of it to stay in control.

    Either way, this is an interesting thing to watch.

    In my view it's a gamble, but it could pay off:

    On the plus side my guess is that Bukele is betting on Bitcoin going up against the dollar long-term, and of course based on the last 12 years that's not an irrational bet to make.

    If that does indeed come to pass then it could be very good for El Salvador's balance of payments, because they could accrue Bitcoin which would increase in value vs the dollar and allow them to acquire more dollars. That would give the government far more leeway in terms of spending (since they don't have their own currency)

    Secondly small nations like El Salvador are always desperate to attract foreign investment, and this could be one way of doing it. My understanding is that there are no regulatory obstacles to converting Bitcoin to USD and no capital gains tax, which makes El Salvador a de facto Bitcoin tax haven. The danger here of course is that it attracts shady people, but I'm sure that's a risk they are willing to take.

    Finally miners are currently being shut down in China, so El Salvador might be somewhere they want to relocate to.

    In terms of risk, well if the price of Bitcoin goes down relative to the dollar then of course the balance of payments issue goes the other way and they could very soon find themselves in all sorts of trouble. The fund for converting BTC to USD is tiny at just $150m and that could become insolvent very quickly.

    Another potential danger is that Strike uses Tether for liquidity, and if anything happens to Tether, and seeing as it's almost certainly a Ponzi that is very likely, then the whole thing could come crashing down overnight.

    But honestly I think the situation has to be watched with an open mind. It certainly gives a new dimension to the whole thing.

  • richardyotrichardyot
    edited June 2021

    @wim said:

    @ervin said:
    Well, I have to admit dendy has consistently come out against the enslavement of people and against scheming states and overreaching governments forcing people to do things. His condemnation of this textbook government abomination should be out any minute now, surely.

    I'm interested in why you think this is a "textbook government abomination". I always assumed it is the right and duty of States to set policy regarding legal currencies in their countries. Does the EU adopting the Euro fall into that category? The US changing from the gold standard? Etc?

    Sincere question. I'm not trying to argue. I'm trying to learn.

    It goes against libertarian principles: the state should not coerce your choice of currency, you should be free to choose.

    In the US merchants are not forced by law to accept dollars as payment, although of course in practice everyone does.

  • wimwim

    BTW, El Salvador ranks sixth in economic reliance on foreign remittances. If it pans out there are other countries that will be bound to take notice.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    @richardyot said:

    @wim said:

    @ervin said:
    Well, I have to admit dendy has consistently come out against the enslavement of people and against scheming states and overreaching governments forcing people to do things. His condemnation of this textbook government abomination should be out any minute now, surely.

    I'm interested in why you think this is a "textbook government abomination". I always assumed it is the right and duty of States to set policy regarding legal currencies in their countries. Does the EU adopting the Euro fall into that category? The US changing from the gold standard? Etc?

    Sincere question. I'm not trying to argue. I'm trying to learn.

    It goes against libertarian principles: the state should not coerce your choice of currency, you should be free to choose.

    In the US merchants are not forced by law to accept dollars as payment, although of course on practice everyone does.

    Says on the money: "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." Does that not mean what I think it does? Maybe so. I don't study this stuff. :#

    Oh, and I'm not a libertarian.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    nvm. Answered my own question.

    I don't see the problem with a sovereign country doing so through their own democratic process though. (Disclaimer: I don't know how "democratic" El Salvador's democratic process is.)

    https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm

    There is no federal statute mandating that a private business, a person, or an organization must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether to accept cash unless there is a state law that says otherwise.

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    @richardyot
    Another potential danger is that Strike uses Tether for liquidity

    From where you have this information ? As i know, Strike is using for clearing USD transfers lightning network. They added USDT and USDC but just as option for another currency for sending .. not as underlaying transaction clearing network.

  • ervinervin
    edited June 2021

    @wim said:

    @ervin said:
    Well, I have to admit dendy has consistently come out against the enslavement of people and against scheming states and overreaching governments forcing people to do things. His condemnation of this textbook government abomination should be out any minute now, surely.

    I'm interested in why you think this is a "textbook government abomination". I always assumed it is the right and duty of States to set policy regarding legal currencies in their countries. Does the EU adopting the Euro fall into that category? The US changing from the gold standard? Etc?

    Sincere question. I'm not trying to argue. I'm trying to learn.

    To quote a classic author: "Sorry man, it was a joke." :)

    But there is a point behind it. Which is that those liberty warriors who consider universal healthcare / social security (which actually saves lives) a government scam that is part of enslaving the people, which I think was one of dendy's stated positions in this thread, should surely not condone a government actually forcing people to use as currency something that they themselves don't even consider fully suitable as currency.

    But they won't condemn it, because bitcoin. 🤷 :)

  • richardyotrichardyot

    @wim said:

    @richardyot said:

    @wim said:

    @ervin said:
    Well, I have to admit dendy has consistently come out against the enslavement of people and against scheming states and overreaching governments forcing people to do things. His condemnation of this textbook government abomination should be out any minute now, surely.

    I'm interested in why you think this is a "textbook government abomination". I always assumed it is the right and duty of States to set policy regarding legal currencies in their countries. Does the EU adopting the Euro fall into that category? The US changing from the gold standard? Etc?

    Sincere question. I'm not trying to argue. I'm trying to learn.

    It goes against libertarian principles: the state should not coerce your choice of currency, you should be free to choose.

    In the US merchants are not forced by law to accept dollars as payment, although of course on practice everyone does.

    Says on the money: "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." Does that not mean what I think it does? Maybe so. I don't study this stuff. :#

    Oh, and I'm not a libertarian.

    I know you're not a libertarian, I was just trying to explain the disconnect that some people are seeing with the El Salvador legal tender law. Personally I'm not bothered and it's not a big deal, but obviously mandating that merchants have to accept a certain currency does not sit well with the idea of personal freedom.

  • richardyotrichardyot
    edited June 2021

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot
    Another potential danger is that Strike uses Tether for liquidity

    From where you have this information ? As i know, Strike is using for clearing USD transfers lightning network. They added USDT and USDC but just as option for another currency for sending .. not as underlaying transaction clearing network.

    In El Salvador they are settling with Tether, not with dollars, as per their CEO (scroll down to the section titled "User Story"):

    https://jimmymow.medium.com/announcing-strike-global-2392b908f611

  • richardyotrichardyot

    Oh and if people want to convert their Tethers back to USD they have to convert to Bitcoin first, which means they are vulnerable to the inherent volatility of Bitcoin.

    And apparently there are only 2 Bitcoin ATMs in the whole country (which are required for withdrawals using Strike).

    Plenty of potential problems in store, but I guess this whole thing was thought up on the hoof.

  • NeuMNeuM

    @richardyot said:
    Oh and if people want to convert their Tethers back to USD they have to convert to Bitcoin first, which means they are vulnerable to the inherent volatility of Bitcoin.

    And apparently there are only 2 Bitcoin ATMs in the whole country (which are required for withdrawals using Strike).

    Plenty of potential problems in store, but I guess this whole thing was thought up on the hoof.

    I’ve given up debating this foolishness. It has devolved into a series of unsupportable arguments against Bitcoin, which is not productive.

  • richardyotrichardyot

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    Oh and if people want to convert their Tethers back to USD they have to convert to Bitcoin first, which means they are vulnerable to the inherent volatility of Bitcoin.

    And apparently there are only 2 Bitcoin ATMs in the whole country (which are required for withdrawals using Strike).

    Plenty of potential problems in store, but I guess this whole thing was thought up on the hoof.

    I’ve given up debating this foolishness. It has devolved into a series of unsupportable arguments against Bitcoin, which is not productive.

    I’m just relating the details of the El Salvador situation, it’s completely factual.

  • NeuMNeuM

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    Oh and if people want to convert their Tethers back to USD they have to convert to Bitcoin first, which means they are vulnerable to the inherent volatility of Bitcoin.

    And apparently there are only 2 Bitcoin ATMs in the whole country (which are required for withdrawals using Strike).

    Plenty of potential problems in store, but I guess this whole thing was thought up on the hoof.

    I’ve given up debating this foolishness. It has devolved into a series of unsupportable arguments against Bitcoin, which is not productive.

    I’m just relating the details of the El Salvador situation, it’s completely factual.

    As far as this particular thread is concerned, I’m through. Enjoy your day.

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    @richardyot

    ahh thanks for link... i was missing point how Strike, when somebody wants transfers USD from/to salvador solves problem of missing banking infrastructure in Salvador (which is main benefit of Strike availability in El Salvador)

    Now it makes sense, pretty smart solution.

    That is of course solution just for El Salvador, EU implementation of strike will not use USDT. Is simply solution for lacking banking in El Salvador. Smart.

    Oh and if people want to convert their Tethers back to USD they have to convert to Bitcoin first

    You still don't underatand the point of Strike, what issue in El Salvador it solves.

    Why would recipient want to convert it to physicall USD ? Where they should then send them when 70% of people are unbanked there ?

    They can pay each other with Strike app using USDT, with zero fees, instantly. It's berfect solution for unbanked people there.

    Just remember, people there don't give crap about Terher fraud fairytale. Strike has huge benefit for them.

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021


    pathetic clowns and parasites 🤮

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    My close acquaintance from El Salvador had some interesting reactions about this move. She said that many people are furious at this move. She still struggles a little with English so we weren't able to dive into the reasons. But she also shed some more light onto the current government there. El Presidente has accumulated vast power in the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. According to her he basically owns the legislature, so that vote was very likely more of a rubber stamp than a true decision.

    There is a lot of fear among Salvadorians that the government is tipping once again toward totalitarianism. Business as usual I'm afraid, except that at least so far no one is dying. Her fear is perfectly understandable given what her parents and grandparents have been through.

    I hope those fears are not born out, and I hope that this Bitcoin experiment(?) is successful. The private pilot certainly seems to have been. Never-coiner or not, I hope that people are pulling for success, for the sake of the people there.

  • richardyotrichardyot

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot

    ahh thanks for link... i was missing point how Strike, when somebody wants transfers USD from/to salvador solves problem of missing banking infrastructure in Salvador (which is main benefit of Strike availability in El Salvador)

    Now it makes sense, pretty smart solution.

    That is of course solution just for El Salvador, EU implementation of strike will not use USDT. Is simply solution for lacking banking in El Salvador. Smart.

    Oh and if people want to convert their Tethers back to USD they have to convert to Bitcoin first

    You still don't underatand the point of Strike, what issue in El Salvador it solves.

    Why would recipient want to convert it to physicall USD ? Where they should then send them when 70% of people are unbanked there ?

    They can pay each other with Strike app using USDT, with zero fees, instantly. It's berfect solution for unbanked people there.

    Just remember, people there don't give crap about Terher fraud fairytale. Strike has huge benefit for them.

    Sure, it all sounds good in theory. But you must admit that if the Tether/USD peg breaks for any reason then people are likely to lose out.

    The PR was that the citizens of El Salvador would be able to use Bitcoin instead of dollars. The reality is that any Bitcoin they send using Strike will be redeemed in Tethers. Not quite the same.

    Tether originally claimed to be fully backed by dollar reserves, now they claim that they are mostly backed by commercial paper. But if they really had $30 billion in commercial paper they would be one of the top ten holders in the world, yet no-one in the commercial paper market has heard of them - they are completely unknown, they don't have a trading desk or accounts with any brokers. There is no paper trail, no audits, nothing but PR and empty claims. It's just like Madoff:

    https://www.ft.com/content/342966af-98dc-4b48-b997-38c00804270a

  • ervinervin

    @richardyot said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot

    ahh thanks for link... i was missing point how Strike, when somebody wants transfers USD from/to salvador solves problem of missing banking infrastructure in Salvador (which is main benefit of Strike availability in El Salvador)

    Now it makes sense, pretty smart solution.

    That is of course solution just for El Salvador, EU implementation of strike will not use USDT. Is simply solution for lacking banking in El Salvador. Smart.

    Oh and if people want to convert their Tethers back to USD they have to convert to Bitcoin first

    You still don't underatand the point of Strike, what issue in El Salvador it solves.

    Why would recipient want to convert it to physicall USD ? Where they should then send them when 70% of people are unbanked there ?

    They can pay each other with Strike app using USDT, with zero fees, instantly. It's berfect solution for unbanked people there.

    Just remember, people there don't give crap about Terher fraud fairytale. Strike has huge benefit for them.

    Sure, it all sounds good in theory. But you must admit that if the Tether/USD peg breaks for any reason then people are likely to lose out.

    The PR was that the citizens of El Salvador would be able to use Bitcoin instead of dollars. The reality is that any Bitcoin they send using Strike will be redeemed in Tethers. Not quite the same.

    Tether originally claimed to be fully backed by dollar reserves, now they claim that they are mostly backed by commercial paper. But if they really had $30 billion in commercial paper they would be one of the top ten holders in the world, yet no-one in the commercial paper market has heard of them - they are completely unknown, they don't have a trading desk or accounts with any brokers. There is no paper trail, no audits, nothing but PR and empty claims. It's just like Madoff:

    https://www.ft.com/content/342966af-98dc-4b48-b997-38c00804270a

    As "fraud fairytales" go, this is a rather good one. 👍

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    @wim said:
    My close acquaintance from El Salvador had some interesting reactions about this move. She said that many people are furious at this move. She still struggles a little with English so we weren't able to dive into the reasons. But she also shed some more light onto the current government there. El Presidente has accumulated vast power in the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. According to her he basically owns the legislature, so that vote was very likely more of a rubber stamp than a true decision.

    There is a lot of fear among Salvadorians that the government is tipping once again toward totalitarianism. Business as usual I'm afraid, except that at least so far no one is dying. Her fear is perfectly understandable given what her parents and grandparents have been through.

    I hope those fears are not born out, and I hope that this Bitcoin experiment(?) is successful. The private pilot certainly seems to have been. Never-coiner or not, I hope that people are pulling for success, for the sake of the people there.

    Saw also lot posts feom Salvadorians on twitter who were saying exact opposite -that El Salvador was very corrupted before and he cleaned lot of shit. It's complicated to judge it through western democracy rules. I believe there are very different conditions than in our part of world. We have no idea where is real thruth, time will show. Sometimes i don't understand moves of politicians in my own country, no chance to fully understand the ones in country on different side of globe.

    One thing is for sure - Bitcoin cannot be used by dictators for controlling people, it works actually in exact opposire way - it's weapon agains dicratorships, giverments and control. That's why most dictators, undemocratic regimes, and in general people who don't like freedom are strongly against Bitcoin.

    So i tend to believe El Presidente's intentions are good, at least partialy. Feels authentic to me, lot more than those fucking clowns from G7 summit :-))

    And if his intentions are bad - weapon he thinks will make him more powerfull, will actually deatroy him :-)) Bitcoin wins either way.

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    good article, shocked by source ...

    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/06/cryptocurrencies-financial-inclusion-help-shape-it/

    this is pretty cool, twitter supporting lightning payments would be major step
    for mass adoption
    https://www.coindesk.com/dorsey-suggests-twitter-lightning-network-integration?amp=1

    edit: that escalated quickly. Two most important Jacks :)

This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2024