Institutional advocacy is not conducted on X.
It is conducted directly with principals, CTOs, risk committees, legal counsel and compliance officers.
Kaspa’s native programmable layer is only a few weeks old. Security auditors are still studying covenants and the blockDAG architecture. That learning curve alone takes time.
Beyond the technology itself sit far heavier requirements that social-media commentary routinely ignores:
• Institutional custody frameworks demand proven controls, independent audits, insurance wrappers, and operational maturity before any serious capital is placed on a new layer.
• Procurement and public/private tendering processes follow multi-stage RFPs, due-diligence cycles, vendor risk assessments and board-level approvals that routinely run 12–24 months.
• Each industry carries its own mandatory standards - financial messaging (ISO 20022), energy settlement, supply-chain provenance, sanctions screening, data-residency rules and sector-specific regulatory sandboxes. Meeting those standards is not optional and cannot be accelerated by tweets.
Sandbox testing, formal verification, regulatory engagement and independent security review all operate on institutional timelines, not crypto-Twitter timelines. Asking major institutions to move valuable assets onto a newly programmable layer without that groundwork is not “ambition” - it is ignorance of how these organisations actually work.
Those of us doing the substantive work understand the sequence and the constraints. Those who do not should stop confusing volume of posts with progress. Patience is part of getting it right.
https://t.co/lpmiycYUBl
U know what is that? first post-quantum signature on kaspa just landed. XMSS^MT
The script is huge (~84KB) because it has to unroll a loop of ~1,650 hashings on-chain but it verifies. and it works.
isn't that cool?
toccata to everyone