When you're talking to people about Bitcoin (or anything), your content is relatively less important. emotion creates motion

You've heard of AMA sessions (Ask Me Anything)? These are powerful sessions where no question is off-limits. It extends our imagination just by attending. But by themselves, they are limited. Why? Because you can only ask what you have the self-awareness to ask. Most of the questions we ask have not that much value. It's about attaining something, or gaining some thing. But most of the things we try to attain and gain aren't even our own innermost intentions, but something we've come to believe is our own desire through osmosis. So what is more powerful than AMA is M-AMA! An AMA session preceded by Meditation. Why? Because Meditation is literally the art of practicing self-awareness. After meditation, the irrelevant questions atrophy and the questions you really want answers to arise. Don't take my word for it though. Like Bitcoin, meditation is best understood my using the tool, not just reading about it! We're having a M-AMA session This Friday 7-7.30pm PDT// Saturday 1pm NZST// Sat 11am AEST You can bring any questions you like: about meditation, SKY breathwork, life, energy, Bitcoin, or whatever. These sessions tend to bring people from around Come a couple of mins early, as we lock the session just after the hour so that latecomers don't disturb meditators. Drop a comment, or message and I'll send you the zoom link to join.

There's a decision-making method gaining traction in AI circles right now. You spin up five AI agents, each with a distinct thinking role: first-principles thinker, contrarian, systems thinker, domain expert, pragmatist. Plus a chairman who runs the process. Each agent drafts an answer independently. The chairman strips the names off and circulates them anonymously. Each agent critiques the others without knowing who wrote what. Then the chairman synthesises the best answer. The anonymity is the genuinely good part. It forces evaluation on content, not on who said it. Ego gets removed from the room. That alone makes it better than most boardroom decisions. But it's still modelled on a boardroom. And a boardroom is not where the best decisions get made. Here's what's missing. 1. No real iteration. Ideas develop the same way people develop: through feedback and iteration. In this model, the iteration is perfunctory. Ideas get assessed, not evolved. 2. No brainstorming. Effective brainstorming deliberately separates "divergent thinking" (the process of imagining all possibilities, including crazy ones) from convergent thinking (the process of whittling them down to what's possible within the constraints of time, space and budgets). The best discussions with the best ideas happen when you go wide first, then narrow. This protocol puts a convergent black-hat thinker in the room at the same time as the divergent thinkers. That collapses the exploration phase before it even starts. 3. Optimised for evaluation, not ideation. It's designed to select the best existing idea rather than generate one that's better than any individual agent could produce. 4. The chairman selects rather than facilitates. There's a difference between choosing the best idea in the room and facilitating the development of the best collective idea. A chairman does the first. A facilitator does the second. Different function entirely. The first is optimized for efficacy of process and efficiency of outcome, the second is optimized for the quality and robustness of the decision. 5. Swimlane identities. Each agent operates within a narrow role. "Domain expert." "Contrarian." Knowledge seldom comes from people locked into narrow identities. It comes from the collision between them. The net result: no ideation, a marginally better selection process, and a high risk that an underdeveloped idea gets chosen. Worse, because the process looks robust and complex, the output runs the risk of getting acted on with more confidence than it deserves. I studied this exact problem during my thesis. I had groups communicating anonymously, analysing a poem (I was an English major), exchanging ideas across rounds. The quality of analysis improved dramatically in the second round - not because the evaluation got sharper, but because people were building on each other's thinking, measurably. They were interchanging ideas, not just ranking them. I've seen the same thing running mastermind groups since. When different minds get in a room and start sparring and introducing ideas, a network effect kicks in. Ideas emerge that no single person in the room could ever have produced. That process creates ideas through a principle that we call "advance and extend". And it's what this five-agent model doesn't have. The fix isn't complicated. Let agents build on each other's drafts across multiple rounds instead of just critiquing them. Replace the chairman with a facilitator agent whose job is synthesis, not selection. Separate the divergent phase from the convergent phase. And stop assigning swimlane identities that constrain what each agent is allowed to think. The five-agent idea is a step forward. But it's a step from a bad process to a less bad process. The leap - to a process that produces genuinely emergent thinking - requires a different model entirely. And that model already exists. It just hasn't been applied to AI ... yet.

One Bitcoiner has just onboarded15 new businesses in his local town (in his spare time). How? A few things but, a key component was getting comfortable leaving things undone, focusing on needle-moving actions and getting better at identifying what those needle-moving actions were (and then taking them)! You can do this too. accebli

A short story about how one Bitcoiner leaning into discomfort rather than running from it, changed the world in a small way for the better, while advancing Bitcoin and his business at the same time.

You are capable of doing much more for Bitcoin than you can probably imagine. ... and here's the proof!

Thank you X for the free Nostr marketing View quoted note →

If you are considering doing something for Bitcoin, but you think you don't have the skills to do it .... GOOD! That's the reason why you should do it. Here's why.

It saddens me when people who experience imposter syndrome dont continue with their projects ... especially when they are cool Bitcoin projects. This mindset shift I've found has helped a lot of Bitcoiners who were experiencing doubt to push through it

Yet to find a single Bitcoiner who has not noticed this same effect. One of the biggest environmental benefits of Bitcoin is how it reduces overconsumption.

3 things are important when you're building a Bitcoin mission! The technical and business side is what gets the attention, but the third element, at least equally important, tends to be get neglected.

It is my duty to remind you that Bitcion will use all the world's power by 2020.

The unexpected advice: A decade ago, I invested a lot in getting my own coach - which one decade later has proven to be the first= best investment I'd ever made. You know what the other one is! I'd run and exited a tech company and had discovered that my passion for for helping people as a coach myself, and had already started coaching a number of CEOs of other tech companies. When I started with my coach, I thought we'd be spending a lot of time on strategy and tactics, new ways to reach new clients etc. Apart from 3-4 sessions, in three years we did almost none of that! Instead he had a radical idea: focus on making me a great coach! By doing that, something funny happened, my coaching business doubled in size during the time I was receiving coaching from him. It was obvious in hindsight. Yet how often do we forgo the obvious and go for the result we want. It's the old adage "everyone wants to be able to say 'I climbed Everest' but no-one wants to put in the work to become the person who can climb Everest. Similarly so many people want to run a successful company, but few put in the effort to become the leader who can run a successful company. Yes, being able to convey the value of what you do is important. That is the multiplier But having something of immense value - be it a product or service comes first. Otherwise you are multiplying a small number. These days, even when I'm helping clients win pitches, the process of pitch coaching usually ends up pointing to gaps in the tech-CEOs offering/product/partnerships that need to be address. I always ask the question "What is the pitch you'd like to be able to give that isn't true yet" - then we reverse-engineer by picking up the things that are not true yet, and see how we can make them happen. The best way to generate more clients is to first become a better coach. And the best way to win a pitch is starts with building something worth pitching.

The first lever that autocratic regimes pull to stop activists fighting for democracy is to sever their access to finance, freeze bank accounts, and track down all those who donated to their cause. For the first time in human history, these human rights activists have a tool do defend themselves against this attack, so they can continue their fight for democracy. This tool is called Bitcoin.

Don't know how this happened so fast, but suddenly I've coached 35 Bitcoiners! I'm a bit overwhelmed by how much they've advanced Bitcoin since. Between them, they've started Nasdaq companies, secured funding (including Ego Death, Tim Draper),scaled mining businesses 10x, and shifted Bitcoin policy measurably across three continents. They did this not (only) because I'm a good coach, but also because Bitcoiners are amazing people and something phenomenal happens when they work as a peer network.  And that made me realize something Despite Bitcoin being superior in every dimension to fiat, it is not certain that Bitcoin will win. Whether it's technology or sports, history is full of examples where the better team came second. In sport, it is often the best coached team is often the winningest team. And like sport, coaching is for those who are already performing well, but want to win on the global stage. My vision is that Bitcoin becomes the best coached team in any industry, any sector, any digital asset in the world by far, and as a result grows faster than any opponents can hold it down. If you'd like to "be the change" by experiencing high-performance coaching in a high-trust group of your Bitcoin peers, or even chat about whether this is a potential fit - reach out.

Breathwork and Bitcoin are a recommended pairing ! Here's why. One of my clients flew to Costa Rica for three days of one-on-one coaching. He had a list of plans to work through, but my intuition said "Nah. We're doing SKY breathing training." After the breathwork in 30 mins he found all the answers to his year planning. The breathwork didn't give him new information - it removed the noise blocking his intuitive wisdom On our debrief call he said five incredible things: 1. "My perceptions with other people are heightened" 2. "It's like everything has a new color in the world" 3. "It's like I'm trying to understand my new superpower" 4. "My meditations are deeper, and I go in faster" 5. "People keep saying 'aren't you tired after all the flights' - but I'm really energized" Here's what Bitcoin and breathwork have in common: - Bitcoin and breathwork both fix the base layer - Both use energy to create something super-resilient - Both reward low-time-preference and give back 10x-100x over time - you can't judge it from the outside, you have to experience it to know it And in each case ... there is no second best! I'm running an introductory session this Friday 7pm PDT. Leave a comment, or DM if you're keen to experience it

I've turned Claude into a BEAST ! 🤣 The biggest problem with all AI and LLMs is it tells you what you want to hear, and is optimized for the most pleasing response by default. Aside from using Claude as a glorified EA, that's often useless, and in many cases dangerous. Claude now challenges me, bosses me around, holds me to account, names unproductive patterns of behavior, brings critical-path activities to my attention that are blocking other work and proactively tells me if I'm focusing on a low value activity relative to my stated goals. As a result it is 3x more useful and 10x less dangerous!

In The Netherlands there is a a limit of €3000 for cash purchases on goods. There is no spending limit on Bitcoin.

BREAKING: Bitcoin CEO issues statement "Unlike Bitcoin, the electricity that powers Telsas is still derived mostly from fossil fuels. When Tesla can show measurable progress on this important issue, we will allow Telsa to start accepting Bitcoin payments again."

Nostr is the only mirror that doesn't tell you what shape to be. Have we been missing the killer-app of Nostr? Only a few people care about the benefits of decentralization because only a few have done enough research to know the perils of centralization. There is an angle that may resonate with a lot of people though. You may have noticed I'm posting a lot more on Nostr now. Why? It had nothing to do with decentralization (although I care about that). But I care even more about people able to live and speak in a free and authentic way without suppression. When you have an algorithm that suppresses what you say if its outside a narrow swimlane of "what this platform decides you should be speaking about" by a factor of 10x, ie: only 10% of the people who could have seen it do, that is an effective 90%-freedom of speech ban. It's also encouraging you to form an identity of a one-dimensional voice, not encouraging the inherent multidimensionality of the human spirit. I want to be free to express myself on any subject. Twitter and LinkedIn say "sure, we wont ban you from that ... we'll just turn down the volume knob from 10 to 1 so only a handful of people can hear you." Nostr is literally the only platform that doesn't adjust the volume setting, so you can express and explore multitudes of your infinite nature, knowing that you'll get a true signal. You know what the highest engagement I got on a post on Nostr in the last 4 weeks was ? - one on why bitcoin is like meditation. That proves that people want original cross-over content that doesn't fit within a swimlane an algorithm has pre-decided you should be talking about. As a test I put the exact same post on L/I and X. You guessed it. Crickets! Its really important that if you want to be someone who expresses themselves freely on many topics, you practice doing that regularly. Nostr is literally fostering the development of more multidimensionality. X and L/I is giving you a chance to practice being one-dimension. And as my friend Aristotle once said "we become what we habitually do." Nostr is not just freedom-tech, it is identity-tech.