🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡)

Who’s gonna carry the boats and the LOGS

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

That’s my secret cap, I’m always angry!

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@MaherAbdelsala https://t.co/5OUynoeH38

[Haseeb ＞|＜ @hosseeb]

There's a lot of confusion about the recently patched Zcash bug. Here's how to actually understand it.

If the bug had been exploited before the patch (very unlikely it was), it would have looked like the shielded pool getting drained. Whoever minted the counterfeit shielded ZEC would want to sell fast, before anyone else found the same bug. And remember, the market for ZEC is almost entirely transparent ZEC, not shielded. You can't dump freshly minted shielded ZEC on Binance or Coinbase without unshielding it first.

The losers in that scenario are shielded holders who sit still. The transparent portion of Zcash is fully visible, so it's trivial to enforce that transparent ZEC never exceeds max supply. If you try to unshield more than the cap, you'll get stopped at the door.

So if you hold transparent ZEC (anyone trading, on an exchange, or doing price discovery on ZEC) there's no marginal effect on you. The loss falls entirely on shielded holders.

The team's next step is a new turnstile and a fresh shielded pool in the coming upgrade, which will confirm the shielded pool was not inflated. Think of it as taking headcount at the end of the field trip--that will make sure no extra kids snuck onto the bus.

But while AI found this bug, AI will also deliver the fix for the whole category: formal verification. I'm very bullish on this as the path to harden all software across the industry. Formally verified cryptography can't have implementation bugs by construction.

Right now AI is surfacing vulnerabilities across all our software--browsers, OSes, and blockchains are no exception. We're in the awkward adolescence where every wart is getting magnified and put on full display. But formally verified software is the only path forward for mission-critical software, and Zcash has put it front and center on their roadmap to deliver.

Privacy is too important not to.

(Dragonfly holds $ZEC and continues to. I'm personally an investor in ZODL.)

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

Finally a logic take. Most people tweet around like headless chicken

[Haseeb ＞|＜ @hosseeb]

There's a lot of confusion about the recently patched Zcash bug. Here's how to actually understand it.

If the bug had been exploited before the patch (very unlikely it was), it would have looked like the shielded pool getting drained. Whoever minted the counterfeit shielded ZEC would want to sell fast, before anyone else found the same bug. And remember, the market for ZEC is almost entirely transparent ZEC, not shielded. You can't dump freshly minted shielded ZEC on Binance or Coinbase without unshielding it first.

The losers in that scenario are shielded holders who sit still. The transparent portion of Zcash is fully visible, so it's trivial to enforce that transparent ZEC never exceeds max supply. If you try to unshield more than the cap, you'll get stopped at the door.

So if you hold transparent ZEC (anyone trading, on an exchange, or doing price discovery on ZEC) there's no marginal effect on you. The loss falls entirely on shielded holders.

The team's next step is a new turnstile and a fresh shielded pool in the coming upgrade, which will confirm the shielded pool was not inflated. Think of it as taking headcount at the end of the field trip--that will make sure no extra kids snuck onto the bus.

But while AI found this bug, AI will also deliver the fix for the whole category: formal verification. I'm very bullish on this as the path to harden all software across the industry. Formally verified cryptography can't have implementation bugs by construction.

Right now AI is surfacing vulnerabilities across all our software--browsers, OSes, and blockchains are no exception. We're in the awkward adolescence where every wart is getting magnified and put on full display. But formally verified software is the only path forward for mission-critical software, and Zcash has put it front and center on their roadmap to deliver.

Privacy is too important not to.

(Dragonfly holds $ZEC and continues to. I'm personally an investor in ZODL.)

[Haseeb ＞|＜ @hosseeb]

There's a lot of confusion about the recently patched Zcash bug. Here's how to actually understand it.

If the bug had been exploited before the patch (very unlikely it was), it would have looked like the shielded pool getting drained. Whoever minted the counterfeit shielded ZEC would want to sell fast, before anyone else found the same bug. And remember, the market for ZEC is almost entirely transparent ZEC, not shielded. You can't dump freshly minted shielded ZEC on Binance or Coinbase without unshielding it first.

The losers in that scenario are shielded holders who sit still. The transparent portion of Zcash is fully visible, so it's trivial to enforce that transparent ZEC never exceeds max supply. If you try to unshield more than the cap, you'll get stopped at the door.

So if you hold transparent ZEC (anyone trading, on an exchange, or doing price discovery on ZEC) there's no marginal effect on you. The loss falls entirely on shielded holders.

The team's next step is a new turnstile and a fresh shielded pool in the coming upgrade, which will confirm the shielded pool was not inflated. Think of it as taking headcount at the end of the field trip--that will make sure no extra kids snuck onto the bus.

But while AI found this bug, AI will also deliver the fix for the whole category: formal verification. I'm very bullish on this as the path to harden all software across the industry. Formally verified cryptography can't have implementation bugs by construction.

Right now AI is surfacing vulnerabilities across all our software--browsers, OSes, and blockchains are no exception. We're in the awkward adolescence where every wart is getting magnified and put on full display. But formally verified software is the only path forward for mission-critical software, and Zcash has put it front and center on their roadmap to deliver.

Privacy is too important not to.

(Dragonfly holds $ZEC and continues to. I'm personally an investor in ZODL.)

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@filbfilb The Alpha Bass

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@filbfilb Absolut mystery for me too. You should be the follower boss. But, if that would be the case, would you still be that outstanding?

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@filbfilb Bless you brother

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@CalebFranzen he snatched 65

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@filbfilb Banana man, banana talk, banana Joe

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@htltimor Whats wrong with saying eat real food? Not so dumb after all

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@Nebraskangooner window

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@Nebraskangooner True

[Philip Swift @PositiveCrypto]

I’ve been thinking about something for a while now, which I thought I'd share. I don't usually do long-form posts or talk too personally, but here we go.

I love Bitcoin. It changed the direction of my life and shaped the work I do every day. But over the past year, something in me has felt muted. I haven’t been as vocal, as present, or as energised as I've been previously. And I’ve struggled to put my finger on why, until now.

Bitcoin hasn’t changed… but the direction of its narrative has.

Since the ETF era began, Bitcoin has increasingly been viewed through an institutional lens: a sound-money financial instrument curated by large institutions. And while there’s nothing inherently wrong with institutional adoption, something about that shift has quietly pulled the story away from what first lit a fire inside me about Bitcoin - a decentralised, permissionless, global network that empowers individuals.

Many people I’ve spoken to recently feel the same shift.

To be clear, ETFs and institutional growth are NOT a bad thing; they’re actually great for driving awareness of Bitcoin.

But Bitcoin’s value grows when more people strengthen its decentralised, self-sovereign network. That’s harder to do when more new entrants buy Bitcoin through ETFs, where the coins sit with a centralised US custodian. That flow doesn’t strengthen the network or advance Bitcoin self-sovereignty.

The roots of Bitcoin - sovereignty, resilience, freedom - still sit with us. With individuals. With people who hold their own keys, run nodes, transact, learn, and push the world steadily closer to decentralisation. We need to water those roots so that the tree can keep growing.

If we want Bitcoin to succeed in the way that matters most, we can’t rely on institutions to carry the narrative for us. They never will. That responsibility sits with us. And on reflection, I haven’t been carrying my share of it lately.

So I’m going to change that. I want to help strengthen the part of Bitcoin that truly matters: self-custody, decentralisation, and personal sovereignty. I’m going to start talking about these more, alongside the data and analysis I already share.

Bitcoin’s value is the number of people who secure it, who build on it, and who use it as a self-sovereign asset. If that fades, the magic of internet money may fade too.

Small actions compound. Every person who secures their own Bitcoin strengthens the network - and conversations about decentralisation strengthen the culture around it.

Right now, the market is still adjusting to this new era. But zooming out, I’m as optimistic as ever - because if we combine institutional awareness with real usage and a renewed focus on self-custody and decentralisation, Bitcoin’s future is incredibly bright.

Thanks for listening.

The future is bright, the future is orange. 🧡

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@DegenPing His name is shillbert

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@JoshMandell6 I put a sell order for a couple at 420, for the lolz. Ready to party

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@JoshMandell6 lol

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@filbfilb lets fucking go

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@AstroCryptoGuru oooh, cute

[🌳 π 4.1 ⓩ (🛡, 🛡) @Chefermittler]

@JoshMandell6 Nothing is real, nothing ever happens... 444