Olivia
Online
Pinned Tweet
Baikal Blockchain & Crypto Summit: Dr Craig S.Wright - Bitcoin as a Data... https://t.co/PA9EaFUnBJ через @YouTube
No. The problem isn't that people are dumping it.
People dump things all the time. Markets exist precisely so people can buy and sell assets.
The question is why they're dumping it.
If the asset had compelling utility, growing transactional demand, and economic use beyond speculation, sellers would be met by buyers seeking that utility.
Instead, much of the demand is speculative. When speculation weakens, people sell because the primary reason they held it was the expectation that someone else would pay more later.
The comedy here is watching people point at a fixed supply as though that settles the matter.
A fixed supply of something nobody wants is still something nobody wants.
A fixed supply of Beanie Babies is not a monetary system.
A fixed supply of tulip bulbs is not an economy.
A fixed supply is not a business model.
So when they chant "21 million" as though they've discovered the philosopher's stone, they're confusing scarcity with value. Scarcity is a necessary condition for some forms of value. It is never a sufficient condition.
The asset isn't valuable because it's scarce. It is only valuable if people want it for a reason beyond hoping the next person pays more.
That is the point they keep missing. And they keep missing it because repeating "21 million" is easier than explaining actual economic demand.
Настоящий форк произошёл, когда другие изменили протокол (BTC). Сохранение протокола — это не форк (BSV).
Because I didn't fork anything.
BTC changed the protocol. BSV restored and preserved the original rules.
Starting a new chain with a new genesis block would have created a different system, not Bitcoin.
The entire point was continuity of the existing ledger, existing transactions, existing ownership records, and the protocol as originally designed.
If you create a new genesis block, you are creating a new asset.
Bitcoin was already running. The objective was not to invent a replacement. It was to keep the original system operating under the original rules.
The real fork occurred when others changed the protocol. Preserving the protocol is not a fork. Changing it is.
Who to follow
$BitcoinHoarder
@BHoarder1
Bitcoin was hijacked. BSV is the 2009 restored version which has unlimited scalability and tremendous functionality. Truthseeker. Trader, doctor.
jt
@jteck1sv
BSV
[email protected]
$1sat $jtech
Brett C. Banfe 🔮 ChampionsTCG.com ✨
@Manifestable
Freedom by choice, Daniel Krawisz dharma, 21e8 explorer, 4th dimension+, MtG, AQAL, chess, disc golf, bitcoin, +love+
HandCash $manifestable
You Bought BTC and Thought It Was Bitcoin
Source: @CsTominaga
"So miners can mine an invalid transaction to empty one address and give it to another address if there was a court order..."
CSW "Yes"
I am pleased to announce that, despite repeated assurances that I already possess more degrees than common sense, I have been accepted for yet another PhD.
This year I will begin doctoral research at Birkbeck, University of London, focusing on the history of money, institutions, accounting systems, and administrative record-keeping.
Some people collect sports cars.
Others collect watches.
I appear to collect dissertations.
What particularly interests me is the evolution of the mechanisms by which societies learned to record obligations, identity, ownership, exchange, and accountability across time. This includes the study of livery records, financial administration, institutional bookkeeping, and the often-overlooked documentary infrastructure that made complex economic systems possible.
Much of modern debate about money begins in the wrong century. People argue endlessly about currencies, banking, and finance while paying remarkably little attention to the ledgers, registries, audits, censuses, rolls, and records that allowed large-scale institutions to function in the first place.
The history of money is, in many respects, the history of information.
Before one can tax, one must count.
Before one can borrow, one must account.
Before one can govern, one must record.
The romantic imagines history is shaped by kings, revolutions, and battles.
The accountant knows it is shaped by whoever kept the books.
So naturally, I have decided to spend the next several years buried in centuries-old records proving that the people with ink, ledgers, and filing systems were often more important than the people with crowns.
🔥🏡 it's fine...
@RonSwanonson When USD 0.0001 is there too.... for BTC
Twenty years ago this month, I stood before a room at Google and presented work on deep learning networks.
For ninety minutes the questions came, and for ninety minutes I answered them.
The objection, when it finally arrived, was wonderfully mundane.
"It requires too much compute."
"Perceptrons are too slow."
I suggested something unfashionable at the time. I suggested looking forward.
Moore's Law was hardly a secret. Computing power was increasing relentlessly. If we started then, if we built for where hardware would be rather than where it happened to be that afternoon, we would arrive ahead of the curve.
The response was largely the sort of practical wisdom that ages badly. The future was judged by the limitations of the present. A common habit among intelligent people.
Today we live in a world intoxicated by Large Language Models.
Every newspaper speaks of them. Every boardroom discusses them. Every investor discovers them with the enthusiasm of a tourist finding Paris.
Yet the amusing thing is that LLMs did not appear because somebody suddenly discovered neural networks. They appeared because computation finally caught up with ideas that many had dismissed as computationally expensive curiosities.
The mathematics did not perform a miracle.
The silicon improved.
What was once "too much compute" became routine.
What was once "too slow" became infrastructure.
What was once dismissed as impractical became one of the largest technological revolutions of the century.
There is a peculiar vanity in assuming that the limits of today's hardware are the limits of tomorrow's civilisation. It is rather like refusing to build a cathedral because one happens to be standing in a quarry.
The future rarely arrives by inventing entirely new ideas.
More often, it arrives by waiting for old ideas to become affordable.
And so here we are, surrounded by LLMs, watching the world celebrate what many once rejected, not because it was wrong, but because it was early.
The difference between a visionary and a sceptic is often nothing more than ten years of semiconductor manufacturing.
Or twenty.
@JoeSchlubb Yes, I knew about it.
My dear fellow,
The truly comic part is not whether BTC is a Ponzi. It is.
The truly comic part is watching someone construct an entire argument upon a number he pulled from the financial equivalent of a séance.
> "Satoshi holds 1,096,361 bitcoins."
How delightful.
The anonymous creator has apparently remained hidden for nearly two decades, defeated intelligence agencies, journalists, academics, corporations, governments, and private investigators alike.
Yet somehow Barry from Crypto Twitter knows the exact contents of his wallet to the nearest coin.
One imagines him peering into the blockchain like an elderly fortune teller examining tea leaves.
"Yes... yes... the spirits reveal precisely 1,096,361..."
The extraordinary thing is that nobody pauses to ask the obvious question.
How do you know?
Not suspect.
Not estimate.
Know.
The answer, of course, is that he doesn't.
Nobody does.
The number exists because a collection of analysts made assumptions about early mining patterns, clustered addresses together, and then other people repeated the estimate so often that it became holy scripture.
A guess repeated a thousand times becomes "common knowledge."
A guess repeated ten thousand times becomes "fact."
A guess repeated a hundred thousand times becomes "everyone knows."
Twitter has elevated this process into a scientific method.
The post therefore boils down to:
"I know exactly how many coins an anonymous person controls despite not knowing who the anonymous person is."
At that point the discussion has already left economics and entered theology.
The rest is merely decoration.
The funniest thing about cryptocurrency culture is that people who claim to distrust authority will unquestioningly believe any number provided by another man with a profile picture and a blue tick.
The medieval church sold relics.
Crypto Twitter sells certainty.
The business model is remarkably similar.
There is no real bull run in gold.
If you believe there is, you do not understand what is happening. Gold is not suddenly becoming magical. What we are seeing is a change in the value of money.
The unit of account is failing. Purchasing power is being drained. People think prices are rising; the deeper truth is that what their money can buy is diminishing.
I have a vision, but I have no interest in becoming the leader of a movement, building an organisation around myself, or spending my time on administration, governance committees, public relations, or bureaucracy.
What I do is build.
I research.
I solve problems.
I release what I create.
Then I move on to the next problem.
If people want to participate, they are welcome to do so.
If they do not, that is their choice.
The project does not depend on consensus, permission, popularity, or approval.
It depends on whether it works.
I intend to build this on Bitcoin. Real Bitcoin. Not as a speculative asset, but as a system for micropayments, economic coordination, and machine-to-machine transactions. The purpose is to create an environment where individuals can build, train, own, and operate specialised agents that provide real services and earn real revenue.
The future I see is not another Google.
It is not another OpenAI.
It is not another giant model attempting to absorb all human knowledge into a single centralised system.
The assumption behind these projects is that intelligence improves as knowledge becomes increasingly concentrated. That if enough information can be gathered into one place, and enough computation applied to it, the result will be superior to distributed human expertise.
This is the same mistake that Hayek criticised and that Mises identified decades earlier.
Knowledge is not centralised.
Knowledge is dispersed.
Knowledge exists in the minds of billions of individuals, each possessing information, experience, judgement, and expertise that cannot be fully aggregated into a central planning system.
What we are seeing now is an attempt to centralise knowledge into AI models.
The result is larger and larger systems that know a little about everything and truly understand very little.
They are useful tools.
But they are not the future.
The future is a world where billions of people build billions of tools.
A world where specialised agents emerge from specialised knowledge.
A world where expertise is created, refined, traded, verified, and improved through open competition.
A world where agents cooperate with other agents, verify one another, challenge one another, and continuously evolve.
The objective is not to create a machine that replaces people.
The objective is to give people the ability to extend themselves.
A lawyer should be able to build legal agents.
An engineer should be able to build engineering agents.
A scientist should be able to build scientific agents.
A teacher should be able to build educational agents.
Every individual should be able to create systems that embody their expertise and contribute to a larger economic network.
The internet connected documents.
This next stage connects expertise.
Not through centralisation, but through specialisation.
Not through planning, but through competition.
Not through a single intelligence, but through an ecosystem of intelligences.
That is the future I am building toward.
Most people believe BTC is more private than Bitcoin SV.
The reality is the opposite. ⚡
One of the least understood advantages of Real Bitcoin (SV) is its superior on-chain privacy through maximum address entropy.
Here’s why:
BTC wallets heavily rely on limited derivation paths.
This dramatically reduces the number of possible addresses that can be generated from a single seed.
Fewer addresses = easier surveillance and transaction tracking 👀
Real Bitcoin (SV), by contrast, fully embraces the entire address space.
No artificial restrictions.
Maximum entropy.
Much harder to link addresses and transactions 🔒
In simple terms:
BSV gives users more privacy by design 💎
While BTC’s popular implementations actively reduce it for convenience.This is not a minor technical detail.
In an era of increasing on-chain surveillance, the protocol that preserves the highest practical entropy has a real privacy advantage. 🛡️
Real Bitcoin (SV) continues to follow Satoshi’s original vision — not only in scalability and utility, but also in protecting user privacy through mathematical design.
The more you understand the technical reality, the clearer it becomes:
Real Bitcoin (SV) is not just faster and cheaper — it is also more private. 🔥
The awakening is accelerating.
The storm is coming. 💥
Sources:
• Satoshi Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” (2008)
• BIP32: Hierarchical Deterministic Wallets (HD Wallets) – limited derivation paths in BTC
• Technical analysis of address entropy and on-chain linkability between BTC and BSV implementations
• Bitcoin SV protocol documentation – unbounded address space and derivation flexibility
#BitcoinPrivacy #RealBitcoin #BitcoinSV #BSV #OnChainPrivacy #AddressEntropy #PrivacyByDesign #SatoshiVision #CryptoPrivacy #BTCvsBSV #Decentralization #FinancialFreedom
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
240.2M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.3M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.6M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
109M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
97.3M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.1M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
90.6M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
86.8M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
80.6M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
72.2M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.4M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.6M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
68.6M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.4M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.5M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
61.1M followers
X
@x
60.9M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
59.9M followers