Тег: Recommendations

Street processions. Recommendations.

Tomorrow, January 31, we take to the streets again. After January 23, we see a fairly clear tactic from the regime: to make coordination as difficult as possible and to knock out all organizers, as well as those who theoretically could be organizers, even if they aren’t currently exposed but were noticed in something similar in the past. In the locations where the protests are held, communication will be jammed, public transport movement will be restricted, sidewalks and roads will be blocked, and establishments will be closed.

Navalny’s headquarters continues to insist that the upcoming action be peaceful. That is, it is suggested not to kick the security forces in the stomach, even if their visors fog up.

How is it proposed to behave within the restrictions imposed on us by the enemy, and those imposed on us by our own command?

  1. This is not the final decisive battle, but simply one of the episodes of a very long confrontation to come.
  2. But tomorrow we must perform more vividly than a week ago.
  3. Most likely, slightly more people will come out, but that is not of particular importance.
  4. We need to demonstrate determination, but at the same time sustain minimal losses.
  5. Therefore, the main emphasis is placed precisely on safety.
  6. Anonymity. Unobtrusive clothing that hides identifying features; definitely wear masks, no badges or other accessories that make identification easier.
  7. Come in groups. If you don’t have your own company, try to attach yourself to someone. You must not remain alone and unsupervised.
  8. Do not stand in squares; move continuously as a dense mass, do not let yourselves be surrounded or split; if the cops try to break into the ranks—link arms.
  9. During detention attempts, grab those being detained, surround the resulting scuffle, and demand that the cops leave without their prize.
  10. Film only the cops on camera. Under no circumstances film your own. Demand that journalists only film wide shots, and only from behind. No interviews—tell them to fuck off. And use profanity specifically, so there is no temptation to broadcast it. The best thing you can do with a pro-government channel journalist is to secretly push them toward the cops and immediately vanish into the crowd.
  11. Do not bring posters. Unless that poster is on plywood, and the plywood is on a sturdy stake. You never know, it might come in handy.
  12. Regarding weapons. Use them only to prevent detention, and only when it is not being recorded by cameras. Stream and gel sprays are good. Aerosols are bad (your own people may suffer).
  13. Banners are needed only for orientation, to understand where the head and tail of the column are. The banner-bearer should not walk on the edge—they are a primary target for detention. If the banner-bearer is detained anyway, take the flag from them, if they don’t think to throw it far into the crowd themselves. Let someone else carry the flag. It is stupid to take the flag with you into the police van.
  14. Chants—keep them to a minimum; it is better to loudly greet friendly motorists who are honking. Chants can also be used to notify the rear ranks of important details of the situation. “Putin is a dick!” is a bad chant. “Cops on the right!” is a good one.
  15. When the end point of the march is reached, you must immediately and very quickly disperse in different directions, but not individually, but in several columns, according to the number of possible directions of movement at the finish point. This is the most dangerous stage of the action; it would be a pity to complete the entire route only to end up in a police van at the very end.
  16. If the cops are waiting at the finish point, do not go there at all—it is better to turn off beforehand and go far to the side, and only end the action at a safe distance from the enemy.

All these recommendations are for the regions. The two capitals have their own specifics, huge experience with such actions, plus a completely different scale; they will figure it out themselves.

As for banal things, like how to behave in the police department, I’ll leave that to the lawyers. First of all, try not to end up there.

Yes, this is all preparation for a past war. If tomorrow we are met not with batons but with water cannons, gas, and rubber bullets, little of these recommendations will be useful. If the situation proves to be that abnormal, you should simply get as far away from the action site as possible, because it will mean that next time you will need to bring completely different equipment.

It is better to repost this text from anonymous accounts.

I’m not calling for this yet, although I really want to, of course

Why is it so important to sell bitcoins for cash, rather than for transfers to a card?

Or—what are the risks of sending bitcoin to a personal card? Because all I hear from everyone is that it should only be cash. Are there real cases where sending to a card led to bad consequences? Does it depend on the amount or other circumstances?

анонимный вопрос

The most direct way to exchange bitcoin for fiat is to sit down together, agree on a deal, then the fiat amount is placed on the table, the bitcoin seller transfers them to the buyer, the parties wait for the first confirmation, after which the seller takes the fiat from the table and puts it in their pocket.

The main inconvenience with this type of deal is the need for very serious trust in the buyer. Nothing stops the cash owner from pulling out a gun after the transaction is complete and demanding their cash back, as well as the private keys to the bitcoin wallet. Using bank transfers instead of cash at least allows you to avoid meeting in person. Therefore, a service such as localbitcoins has gained considerable popularity.

The essence of exchanging through this service is that the parties trust the service itself rather than each other. One party publishes an ad, the second responds to it, after which the seller’s bitcoins (previously transferred to an online wallet belonging to the service) are frozen. When the bank transfer is received from the buyer, the seller notifies the service, and the service transfers the bitcoins to the buyer. If a conflict arises, the service acts as a judge (so-called escrow), requires proof of money transfer and proof of non-receipt on the account from the parties, after which it makes a decision in favor of one of the parties.

From the bank’s point of view, it is a transfer from one individual to another individual. The bank knows nothing about any bitcoins. Reversing such a transfer is practically impossible. Of course, as part of the fight against money laundering, the bank may freeze the transfer, but that is the buyer’s problem—they will not receive the bitcoins, the frozen amount will simply return to the seller, and the seller can make another attempt.

Localbitcoins is a large international service that is good because it allows you to obtain fiat money from any country, wherever you are. But specifically in Russia, I personally find it more convenient to use a Telegram bot with completely identical functionality (I have already advertised it here).

In any such service, there is also the option to buy bitcoin for cash. I haven’t used it myself because the rate is usually much less favorable. Remotely, this is done by topping up the bitcoin seller’s card with cash at an ATM. This method provides the greatest security for buying bitcoins, as the buyer’s personal data does not reach any bank. As for the seller, they don’t care; the fiat still ends up in a bank account.

Bitcoins can also be bought for cash in crypto ATMs, but selling them for fiat in this way is not yet possible. As Lightning is implemented, crypto ATMs with the ability to operate in both directions will likely enter the market.

To summarize. Buying bitcoins for cash is indeed a way to ensure additional anonymity. Selling bitcoins for cash carries the same risks at best, and even more serious ones at worst. As long as your sales volume is small, receiving fiat on a bank card is the most reliable way to protect yourself. When volumes grow, you can accept fiat on cards from different banks. If they grow even further—try using strawmen.

And for the most paranoid, I want to recommend an article from a very peculiar channel Cryptoagora, where even more curious ways of ensuring anonymity when working with fiat are detailed.

Connecto VPN

During the period when Roskomnadzor was going crazy and using a scattergun approach in attempts to block Telegram, a proxy from Vee Security helped many Russian users. Now Roskomnadzor has toned down its fervor, Telegram has become smarter, and for most of the time, it no longer requires a proxy.

However, this episode demonstrated that people in a repressive state (and potentially all states are repressive) should learn the rules of network hygiene in advance. In particular, one means for this is the use of VPN services.

Of course, if you have specific tasks such as surfing from behind the Great Firewall of China or watching movies on Netflix from a country where it does not distribute content, you have likely already found reliable, fast, and expensive services for this. However, for the vast majority of users, this is excessive functionality that they do not want to overpay for.

Connecto VPN by Vee Security is exactly such an optimal solution for our modest market. On one hand, there is a clear emphasis on security. No logs, no mandatory personal data when connecting, and if desired, the service can be paid for with cryptocurrencies. On the other hand, with monthly payment, the price is only four euros per month, while the market leaders ask for around ten.

The company has only four servers so far, but I read winter reviews, and there were three back then. Steady growth as the company scales is a good, sustainable business model. Vee Security is located in the safe Estonian jurisdiction, so Russian clients have nothing to fear in this regard.

For everyone who decides to connect to the Connecto VPN service via my link, I will receive 2 euros for a monthly subscription, 5 euros for a semi-annual one, and 8 euros for an annual one. So, if you were thinking about donating some money to me anyway, you can combine business with pleasure. The service is truly good; I have read many warm reviews about it, not only immediately before writing this article while trying to find any pitfalls, but long before that, from my acquaintances. Usually, they praised it.

At the same time, I recommend subscribing to the channel of the owner of Vee Security, dedicated to cybersecurity. Security issues can also be discussed in the corresponding chat.

Subjective Ethical Utilitarianism

I would like to recommend a very interesting article written byCreadon and published in the Freedom pride public page on the wretched VKontakte. The article brings ethics closer to economics within the framework of the general principle of methodological subjectivism, which is precisely why it is valuable, since economic theory is already very well developed and derived quite rigorously, whereas libertarian ethics has been attempted to be built on all sorts of strange foundations. Here, the foundation is reliable. I will provide a fragment as a teaser:

Let’s be blunt: nobody owes anyone anything. Instead of dividing people into debtors and beneficiaries, we will consider all human actions in a more general form — as a balance between rewards and costs. And questions of debt will remain a special case of this balance.
This can be briefly characterized as “subjective utilitarianism“. Subjective because it views people as subjects of action and takes into account their goals and means. Utilitarianism because its goal is maximum efficiency and maximum utility. This concept has great potential because, based on the same game theory, the most efficient strategies will win in repeated dilemmas. Moreover, “utility” itself has a very important property — within science, it is quite easily integrated into formal systems and exists there as an axiomatic crutch. Relying on this crutch, we can build further analysis around the system of utilitarianism without getting stuck in a dead end.

Imagine the interaction of individuals as a huge game where all resources are limited, and there are no hundred-percent guarantees or unconditional boons falling from the sky. The only way to obtain resources in such a system is by completing tasks. Each task has two parameters: the price (or cost) we pay for its execution and the result, which is our reward. When the reward exceeds the costs, we take on such a project. When the costs exceed the reward, we leave it. And yet, since human predictive abilities are not perfect, we sometimes miss the opportunity to participate in a profitable project. Or, conversely, we take on a doomed cause and incur losses.

Even if we add to these reflections some higher authority (for example, God), who will punish us for transgressions according to His principles, the central idea of the model will not go anywhere. We still have tasks that have their own price and their own reward. The price of an apple could be climbing a tree or going to the store. The price of sinning, say, committing adultery, is eternity in Hell.

It is important to understand that obligation is someone’s subjective perspective. In the cashier’s opinion, you must pay for the goods. In your mother’s opinion, you ought to visit her more often. In the opinion of the public (despite the vagueness of this category, nevertheless), you must observe generally accepted norms of behavior. In the opinion of the state, you must pay taxes. And the final decision on all these dilemmas, regardless of the circumstances, is made by the acting subject himself.

You. It is for you to decide whom you owe and what.