Dr. Bit Meow, DDS

🇨🇦 Ex-dentist. walked away from clown world.

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

Day 0/21 - #MakeAmericaHealthyAgain #MAHA

The way dentists treat chronic disease in the mouth never made sense to me

If you're frustrated that your gums keep bleeding despite being diligent with oral care, or never found resolution to TMJD/sore jaw, please watch

Thank you @CaseyMeansMD @hubermanlab for exposing me to this subject

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@Rajatsoni Bitcoin partnering with legacy banking was inevitable, but yeah, an influencer who doesn't espouse principles of self-custody, sovereignty, decentralization and who created a Rube Goldberg fiat machine to accumulate corn on leverage isn't good for Bitcoin

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@tylerblack32 Do you have specific critiques on these kind of publications which aren't ad hominem "awful scientists?"

https://t.co/O27QhaPdTk

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@bryan_johnson "If you get the message, hang up the phone. For psychedelic drugs are simply instruments, like microscopes, telescopes, and telephones. The biologist does not sit with eye permanently glued to the microscope, he goes away and works on what he has seen."

- Alan Watts

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@shieldy67 @ThomasSowell Worth watching:

https://t.co/ceYnpFbYsB

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@medicgordus @Dennis_Porter_ The incentive of self-hosting is not trusting anyone else to tell you if your transaction is valid or not

With a bonus of increased privacy

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

You're a fraud. You wrote a book called "The Certainly Illusion."

Individuals who reason from first principles know that patients can't provide informed consent for mRNA therapy because the clinician doesn't have sufficient data to disclose all the tradeoffs

The right thing to do if we don't know is a hands-off, wait-and-see approach

The wrong thing to do is to blindly mandate a highly consequential intervention

The irony of projecting your hubris while simultaneously writing a book on not knowing what you don't know is too much

It's because of retards like you that I had to leave the life I built here

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@jratcliff I've sought the perfect burger for the better part of 2 decades

#1: PVG food truck based out of Winnipeg, Canada

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@zkouwe @APompliano No

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@nvk @citadeldispatch - comprehensive breakdown of Key Teleport, including best practices if working remotely with a normie family member

- trade-offs of CC co-sign. What situation is this feature best suited for?

- updated best practices for 2/3 or 3/5 multi Sig

Thanks 🙏

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@doctorstaci I found the same to be true of TMJD and most other chronic diseases in the oral maxillofacial region

Then made a video series to address it
https://t.co/vqEdppTmer

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

Day 0/21 - #MakeAmericaHealthyAgain #MAHA

The way dentists treat chronic disease in the mouth never made sense to me

If you're frustrated that your gums keep bleeding despite being diligent with oral care, or never found resolution to TMJD/sore jaw, please watch

Thank you @CaseyMeansMD @hubermanlab for exposing me to this subject

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@R89Capital @PierrePoilievre Pierre demonstrates his understanding what #Bitcoin means for 🇨🇦 on a @WhatisMoneyShow @Breedlove22 podcast

https://t.co/DpD3STiHql

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@SaeWott @RobertKennedyJr https://t.co/vX1M451cRX

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@RobertKennedyJr claims that fluoride in the drinking water is toxic.

Is he right? Find out! 👇

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@SaeWott @RobertKennedyJr Got it - feel free to stay oblivious

You're not the target audience. Those who bought the toothpaste know they can get the same thing for $12.99 off Amazon, but choose to capitalize Bitcoin-adjacent businesses for the future they wish to see

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

Because someone who understands the issue wouldn't have said "threw in Bitcoin."

A person with deep understanding would've seen that the quality of healthcare is intertwined with the quality of money, both of which are low today

But go on, demonstrate your understanding if you wish

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

Iirc, stablecoins used the omni protocol first (on Bitcoin). High tx fees priced it out into eth. Same reason it's shifted to Tron now. Tether CTO @paoloardoino indicates interest in building on lightning through TARO (asset tokenization protocol on Bitcoin's lightning network)

I see the desirability of cheap scalable transactions, but I don't see the need to build other base layer chains for that. Other chains may have filled a market need at this time, but sound engineering takes time and imo a better version of what altcoins offer will eventually be built on Bitcoin

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

Best critique of #Bitcoin I've seen in a while

Am I complacent in believing Bitcoin still wins in a world where a small minority use base-layer UTXO's?

[jamesob @jamesob]

BITCOIN CORE'S LOSS OF FOCUS

The legacy technical leadership in bitcoin is becoming increasingly less effective.

--

Almost universally, Core and "graybeard" devs are not focusing on _the_ fundamental problem in bitcoin: preserving trustless UTXO ownership.

Instead they are distracted with valuable but secondary issues like mempool policy, Core code architecture, and minor IBD performance. These things are important in their own right, but they fundamentally don't matter if in times of trouble most users can't take possession of their own coins.

Core devs are exceptionally talented people. The brightest engineers. But the priorities of the project are out of whack.

The aggregate focus does not reflect the thing that makes bitcoin a unique asset: trustless custody.

--

Given the current limits of bitcoin, even upper-middle class Americans will not be able to self-custody, let alone the rest of the world.

If bitcoin doesn't figure out how to ensure that most users have a trustless way of owning and sometimes moving coins, it will become basically indistinguishable from a gold ETF. A row in some OFAC-compliant database. Another financial widget that is subject to the regulatory dictates of government.

In fact, if bitcoin does not scale UTXO ownership, gold will have the advantage that at least small amounts of it *can* be self-custodied and traded peer-to-peer. The same won't be able to be said for bitcoin. In a world where on-chain fees are in the thousands of dollars and there is not a workable, trustless layer two, most coins will be stuck with custodians.

Forget payments. I'm talking about savings. I'm talking about less than checking-account volume. 1-2 transactions a month.

If you think that most people should be able to DCA and withdrawal to self-custody once a month, maybe spend once every few years for big purchases, I've got news for you:

Given bitcoin's current limitations, only 18 million users can do that. A little over 5% of Americans.

--

Right now, the chain capacity is able to meet demand for self-custody because we are in a time of relative peace.

Most don't feel at risk keeping their bitcoin with a custodian. That can change very rapidly.

As bitcoin grows in value and challenges fiat currency, governments will increasingly want to control it. They won't ban it, which is now obvious, but almost certainly they will impose OFAC-like restrictions and possible wealth taxes.

When the regulatory hammer comes down, tens of millions will look to withdrawal their coins into self-custody. But they may not be able to.

--

Unfortunately this risk does not seem to be top of mind in the current Core culture.

One instance of a tone-deaf Core response to this kind of problem relates to CTV. As @JeremyRubin has been pointing out for years, CTV would be the most efficient way to guarantee that people can withdrawal coins from institutions in times of chain-panic and congestion, allowing exit to happen during crises without fully "unrolling" transactions. I wrote about this at length in 2023, and why it seems there is no more efficient way to do this (https://t.co/U2qqgZJYCt).

And yet technical figureheads like @TheBlueMatt and @murchandamus downplay the value of CTV, claiming that it has no compelling uses.

CTV is one of the primitive building blocks that we need to figure out UTXO scaling solutions. (Not to mention its use in applications like vaults.)

Some Core devs might argue "well okay, maybe we need that functionality - but CTV isn't the right way to do it. We need to think harder!"

The problem is that time is running out. As nation-states begin to enter the technical ecosystem, soft forks that promote scaling and self-custody will be more difficult to deploy. Powerful actors will not want bitcoin to change - they're perfectly happy letting regulated custodians act as the L2.

As the market cap grows, the stakes of change go up, and it will be much harder to get economically relevant actors to run new consensus.

Because Core devs aren't paying close attention to the covenants conversation, they may not realize that CTV is upgradeable, simple, and well-tested. It's good enough.

This gap in understanding partially reveals that those devs prefer to work on more smaller self-contained puzzle problems that are more tractable. Maybe this is understandable given the fraught Core development process and historical drama of soft forks, but neither of those are an excuse for abandoning the core challenge of realizing bitcoin.

--

Segwit and Taproot were massive changes, and I can almost understand why so much drama was spent on them. They both basically reinvented how locking scripts are stored and executed in bitcoin.

But to make significant headway on finding a scaling solution for self-custody, it may only take a few opcodes - much more narrowly scoped bits of functionality. Changes that are much easier to test and reason about, and don't reinvent the engine of bitcoin.

--

As I continue campaigning for a renewed focus on scaling coin ownership, some may compare me to the "big blockers" of the 2017 scaling wars.

The big-blockers camp wanted to raise the blocksize for the sake of housing the world's P2P payments. They resisted the use of Lightning and other second layer solutions.

The reality is that they have been partially vindicated. Lightning has not solved our problems, and given the on-chain footprint that existing channel constructions require, it categorically cannot. Lightning certainly helps reduce on-chain payment volume once someone has opened a channel - but to do that for most people will require a layer 1 innovation.

I don't share the big blockers' objectives.

I don't think that trying to fit the world's P2P payments on the base chain is a reasonable target.

But the ability to resist near complete capture of UTXO custody by third-party financial institutions - *that* is intertwined with the core purpose of bitcoin.

In Satoshi's whitepaper, the first sentence claims

"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution."

If most users become unable to even take possession of their own coins a few times a year, we have failed on the objective.

--

I am not writing this out of any sense of antagonism. Yes, I am frustrated that after numerous attempts, Core devs are not engaging more productively with the few people trying to translate scaling strategies to the base layer.

But I'm hoping that by calling attention to this issue, we can get some of these great minds to refocus on bitcoin's critical mission, and to realize that ossification will come sooner than we thought.

The existing (and well-funded) power structures *want* stasis.

The recent show of rapid institutional affinity should make you suspicious that bitcoin in its current form isn't a threat to the fiat order.

The lack of "ivory tower" attendance in the recent OP_NEXT and the broader covenants discourse demonstrates that, like many of America's elite institutions, there has been mission drift in bitcoin's technical elite. I hope this changes.

--

The risk of merging many of the opcodes proposed during the last few years is limited.

OP_CAT, OP_CTV, lnhance, probably OP_CCV, some others; they're all fine. If sufficiently tested, great additions to bitcoin.

We can pretty easily mitigate what risk there is with comprehensive testing and analysis, provided the focus is there.

The upside is almost infinite: a reasonable attempt to continue the preservation of bitcoin's unique function - trustless self-custody that is practically available to most.

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@Kali_fissure @DrNeilStone The higher the cost of living, the less affordable healthy whole foods become + the less time parents have to look after their children = the more the diet shifts towards ultra processed junk that fuels cavities

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

You're probably referring to Calgary and how they stopped water fluoridation in 2011, only to resume it in 2024

They compared DFMT scores amongst children vs Edmonton and noticed a 1.something increase. No change amongst adults

Something like 61% of ppl voted to re introduce fluoride, without considering the vast majority of other jurisdictions had DFMT increase the same amount, regardless of water fluoridation status

Run the data, DFMT scores are most highly correlated to localized inflation than anything else

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@bobz44 I'd call that a feature, not a bug. A world money that everyone converges on shouldn't be changing

What features do you think it's missing?

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

@SaeWott @RobertKennedyJr Pity you don't understand why Bitcoin fixes this

[Dr. Bit Meow, DDS @DrBitMeow]

I value a neutral, global, censorship resistant, immutable, hard-capped money. Bitcoin is several orders of magnitude better than anything else I can own with those properties, and thus to me has the most "utility."

Those properties are unique to Bitcoin because of its massive accumulation of proof-of-work

The entire architecture of a blockchain optimizes for decentralized security at the expense of scalability. It's big, slow, dumb, but does one thing very well: decentralized consensus

If you're going to make tradeoffs, what application could be worthwhile enough to use a blockchain? What problem does "crypto" solve for you?