The Wikimedia Foundation’s chief technology and product officer explains how she helps manage one of the most visited sites in the world in the age of generative AI.

The GENIUS Act would require banks to prioritize stablecoin owners over customers if there’s a financial collapse.

Mayor Ed Gainey said there are 400 additional crews headed to the area, and 70 already called in to aid Duquesne Light.

The claim that “Bitcoin is for everyone” or “non-partisan” is a narrative aggressively promoted by crypto advocates, often citing a single, self-published survey from The Nakamoto Project. But a closer examination reveals Bitcoin’s political alignment is far from neutral, its infrastructure and advocacy lean overwhelmingly right-wing. Here’s why the “for all” narrative is a myth. — ### 1. The Nakamoto Report: A Pro-Bitcoin Propaganda Tool The Nakamoto Project’s much-touted “American Bitcoin Survey” is not credible research. Published in 2024 by a pro-Bitcoin nonprofit with no prior publications or academic track record, the report was designed to push the narrative that Bitcoin transcends politics. It was never peer-reviewed, lacks transparency in methodology, and was promoted almost exclusively within crypto echo chambers like X (Twitter). This isn’t science, it’s marketing. The Nakamoto Project’s mission is explicitly to “spread the word about Bitcoin’s potential,” not to conduct unbiased analysis. Its findings about Bitcoin’s “non-partisan” appeal are as trustworthy as a Big Oil-funded study claiming fossil fuels are environmentally friendly. — ### 2. Real-World Alliances Don’t Lie While the Nakamoto Report insists Bitcoin has no political home, the facts say otherwise: - Pro-Crypto Advocacy: Major organizations like Stand With Crypto funnel donations overwhelmingly to Republicans. The Bitcoin Conference platformed Donald Trump, while Kamala Harris’s 2022 statement on crypto was met with hostility. - Anti-Crypto Regulation: Democrats like Elizabeth Warren lead efforts to regulate crypto-mining and protect consumers, while Republicans increasingly embrace crypto as a wedge against “big government.” - Media Narratives: Left-leaning outlets (CNN, Slate) regularly criticize crypto’s scams and environmental harm, while right-wing media (Fox, Breitbart) are generally silent on the matter. There are no prominent right-wing anti-crypto movements or left-wing pro-crypto organizations. Where as r/Buttcoin is a left-wing anti-crypto organization and Stand With Crypto is a pro-crypto right-wing organization. The asymmetry is undeniable. — ### 3. Social Media’s Ideological Split Platform loyalty mirrors Bitcoin’s partisan divide: - Pro-Crypto/Right: X (Twitter), Nostr, and crypto subreddits host libertarian and conservative communities. - Anti-Crypto/Left: Mastodon, Bluesky, and mainstream Reddit (e.g., r/Buttcoin) skew progressive and skeptical. Bitcoin’s cultural home is X, a platform increasingly aligned with right-wing politics, while left-leaning spaces treat crypto with distrust. — ### 4. The “Both Sides” Myth Yes, individuals on the left own Bitcoin. But institutional power matters. When crypto’s loudest advocates, political donors, and media allies lean right, the movement’s trajectory is clear. The Nakamoto Report’s insistence on neutrality is a strategic deflection to obscure Bitcoin’s ideological roots and recruit unwitting allies. — ## Conclusion: Bitcoin’s Right-Wing Infrastructure Bitcoin’s “non-partisan” narrative is a PR tactic to sanitize its image. The Nakamoto Report, amplified through crypto circles, is part of this campaign. While Bitcoiners exist across the spectrum, the movement’s funding, political alliances, and cultural ecosystems are rooted in libertarian and conservative circles. Recognizing this divide isn’t about gatekeeping, it’s about honesty. Bitcoin isn’t for everyone. It’s for those willing to align with its right-wing infrastructure. — Sources: - The Nakamoto Project [https://www.thenakamotoproject.org/] - Front Pages Bot (Mastodon) [https://mastodon.social/@FrontPagesBot/114243610527482914]

@BuckRogers1965@cr8r.gg That's a good question. If you were in charge of the university what would you do? Would you let the university become a woman's college and in the long run ruin the college's reputation? It's an interesting question if there is some value in giving underrepresented people an advantage even if this applies to men.

Hi, I’m Nicole! But you can call me the Fediverse Chick :D For when you or others get nicoled.