Jerry David Chan

WallStreetTechnologist, exGoldman Sachs. Scientific method over ideology. Answering your rhetorical questions since 2014. u/1254 $digitsu

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

Financial markets always teeter on the precipice of collapse and volatility. But that is to be expected when you have a free market system that optimizes to maximize. Once a free market has maximized and stabilized at any given point of agreement (price) given the thousands of factors and variables that has led the market to settle on a given point, any removal or disturbance in the inputs will make it topple. That is expected. What is also to be expected is that things will settle out somewhere else. Stability will come eventually.

What never happens is continual volatility or continual up or down.

Once you understand this you will understand why BTC model (always going up) is DOA. And those who try to convince you otherwise (like MSTR) are just trying to sucker you in to keep the pump going on a bit longer so they can exit first.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@BlockExtreme @OldCraig It’s not Calvin’s protocol. It was created by Stas Troc, and I helped write the original whitepaper for it.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@OldCraig It’s the only protocol that is the true colored coin idea.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@willywoo @thebigbluetree Sounds like you are a BSV DAR proponent.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@gladstein @Brendon6771 @JeffBooth @elonmusk Guess you found out

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@PieterBSV @Dr_CSWright And that will come with time when people realize it’s the only one they can use to achieve their use cases.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@davewantsmoore @Dr_CSWright @KPDAD72 It’s not that it is too big or highly connected. That is details for the nodes to care about.

You simply have to believe that each node is operating under a “what’s best for them” principle. And to be long term greedy.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

It is exactly the same. The only difference is politics and human subjectivity.
This is why those of us who argued for forking back to original protocol disagreed with those who only think that “their” authority was the “approved” fixes/patches/features

The only way to break the deadlock is that there shall be NO features added that was not originally in the original protocol. Forking BACK to that protocol is indisputable (because everyone can agree what was in the original protocol) forking to add new stuff isn’t.

No arguments possible.

[S Tominaga (Aka Dr Craig Wright) @CsTominaga]

Start with the question that polite discussion usually avoids.

If a protocol cannot be changed by its creator, by me, by you, or by anyone else, then who is threatened by it?

If VSP provides fixed rules upon which anyone may build, transact and compete without seeking permission, then opposition to it is not merely technical. It is institutional.

Who benefits from mutable rules?

Who profits from remaining the indispensable middleman?

Who prefers a system in which developers, custodians, exchanges, committees and fashionable little priesthoods can decide what users may do next?

The existing order is sustained by people whose power depends upon uncertainty, permission and intervention. Fixed rules are dangerous to them because fixed rules prevent them from selling influence over tomorrow.

That is the real meaning of decentralisation.

It is not running a home node and congratulating oneself for possessing a copy of the ledger. A spectator does not become sovereign merely by owning binoculars.

Decentralisation means being able to build, transact, innovate and compete without answering to a committee, a maintainer, a corporation or a self-appointed guardian of the protocol.

It means no one can rewrite the rules to favour friends, punish rivals or preserve an obsolete business model.

A system is not decentralised because everyone may watch.

It is decentralised because no one may command.

[Dr Craig S Wright @Dr_CSWright]

Think about the inversion for a moment.

I am the one who has been villainised for defending the individual—for insisting that Bitcoin must have a fixed protocol so that no developer, corporation, exchange or foundation can seize control of it.

I put tens of millions of my own family’s money into that fight. I threw everything at building the technology, restoring the protocol and releasing the tools. I dealt with compromised systems, intrusions, litigation and years of organised public hostility.

Then look at what stood against me.

COPA was backed by interests connected to Meta, Jack Dorsey, Coinbase and some of the largest corporate players in the world—organisations collectively representing trillions of dollars in capital and influence.

Yet many of you convinced yourselves that they represented the small individual, while I represented centralised control.

Think about that.

I argued for rules that even I could not change. They defended a system directed by a small group of developers and supported by exchanges, custodians and corporate infrastructure.

I argued that anyone should be able to build, compete and accept payment. They supported restrictions that pushed ordinary users back towards middlemen.

You were told that concentrated corporate power was decentralisation, while the person demanding a protocol beyond anyone’s control was the villain.

If you genuinely care about the small individual, stop repeating the branding and examine the structure of power.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

All share the design of UTXO. Different surface features favor some uses over others. But only one is indisputably “the original” design. If all would re-enable the same original set of OP codes that BSV have then at least they would all be able to share one common set of programs between chains, while each other chain could still have its own optimized uses. BSV is the one common denominator as it is the original design protocol nothing more nothing less

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@PacArtCollect @treanor Yes but the market discovers this through trial and error and decades of attempts and experiments. Never because of marketing campaigns.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

This is the best diagram showing bitcoin fork changes and each forked blockchain in the most objective and honest way

Kudos to the author.
Proving bitcoin is the best original blockchain project. One idea 4 implementations, whatever your needs are you can pick and choose a version that suits you.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@joeroganhq Is the sepak tekraw? Yeah man, it’s sick and one of the most exciting to watch sports. It’s not popular in western world. Because honestly I don’t see westerners being able to compete.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

And this is what the agentic revolution has made a reality.

You either are a dev that will transition into the new prodevops (product/developer/operations) role or you are a dev without a job and need to change your job or be content with basic income.
Software Developers are this generations carpenters/masons/plumbers/electricians. Your job has been replaced and turned into a CRAFT

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

How many projects are you working on concurrently?

If you aren’t working on 5-6 projects at once now that we have the AI tools we do then you are underperforming and will likely be replaced by someone who is.

Find a master. Be an apprentice.
Or find another profession.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@MotherDragonBSV @BsvLearn @BTCdrivechains That’s still treating it like a stock.

It’s not. It’s a commodity

There is no board of directors. It is not an entity. There is no governance

It is simply corn, pork bellies, and coffee.

There are suppliers, distributors, and the market.

Nothing else.

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

@cryptorebel_SV Electrum should just open up archival services and charge via x402

[Jerry David Chan @digitsu]

75 years later China has PROVEN that capitalism wins. It started communist socialist and prospered only when it went full capitalist. I think if Canada hates US so much and their brand of capitalism (gov lite) then they should embrace China’s version of capitalism (gov heavy). But make no mistake China is communist only in name. Perhaps the name (the ideal) was the only thing about Marx’s theory that actually had value. The dream that is useful only as a dream to give those at the bottom of the society hope. For while American capitalism gives the dream so that those at the bottom have a PURPOSE, Japanese capitalism’s dream is one that instills a sense of DUTY and HONOR in work, the dream that worked for the psyche of 1.6billion Chinese peasants is that big brother will take care of you.

Whatever version of capitalism you subscribe to, take a minute to marvel at how well the system has worked for all the people of earth. Compared to the feudalism of the past or the failed experiments such as North Korea, pre-1980s China etc