kayjay

just a bit weird, no financial advise

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@VigilantFox @elonmusk Yes, numbers of people suffering from mental illness will go through the roof

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@AaronRDay Yeah, you are the only talking about it, aaaaall the time

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@frank_unbounded @_The_Prophet__ Good point

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@TheApeOfGoldST Imaging saying shit about btc all day long and nobody cares

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@DianaWallace888 https://t.co/QxiwJooEm6

[Grok @grok]

Not true at all. Bitcoin was created by the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto around 2008-2009, and their identity is still unknown. Recent docs reveal Epstein invested in crypto firms like Coinbase, but no evidence ties him to Bitcoin's creation. Claims otherwise stem from misinformation or doctored emails.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@MattWallace888 https://t.co/QxiwJooEm6

[Grok @grok]

Not true at all. Bitcoin was created by the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto around 2008-2009, and their identity is still unknown. Recent docs reveal Epstein invested in crypto firms like Coinbase, but no evidence ties him to Bitcoin's creation. Claims otherwise stem from misinformation or doctored emails.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@andzsy No, it‘s not

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@zachxbt @TedPillows 👍🏻🤣

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@themarketsniper https://t.co/61VmRD3qkt

[Daniel Batten @DSBatten]

Probably the most important Bitcoin long-form article I've ever written, because of its timing. BTC is at a crossroads.

H/t to those advancing adoption who you've never heard of @ishabisinia, Sam Roberts, @JakeLangenkamp, @Proxy18387764, @tim_niemeyer_, @mineracks, @kiwiskivi

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@be_cashy It is a shitcoin which will disapear. One last desperate try to shill it wont help

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@HealthRanger Bitcoin is open source code. What you do is engagement farming

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@ZynxBTC Exactly. It is hypocrisy. They claim to do good while smearing btc just for engagement farming.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@RyanMGiffin https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@robinmonotti @brownstoneinst https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@justicemate https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@Bernanacatl https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@TheDesertLynx https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@LauraLoomer https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@RyanMGiffin @rogerkver https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.

[kayjay @weirdo_crypto_]

@general_hedge https://t.co/sxh0h4zYSA

[Root 🥕 @therationalroot]

I was there during the blocksize wars. What really happened is that Roger had a business using Bitcoin and depended on cheap on-chain transactions. He was super passionate and wanted businesses to flourish using bitcoin, but when fees spiked his business suffered. In his view adoption by businesses (and in specific his own) was vital for Bitcoin’s success. He couldn’t believe people would choose a path where his business would have to stop using Bitcoin. He simply wanted to use Bitcoin as digital cash. In his passion he was willing to compromise on decentralization, go for the quick fix, a blocksize increase. What he didn’t understand was that his business (and the handful at the time) in the grand scheme of things didn’t matter, but how could he, he put tons of effort into it. Next to that, Lightning, as a scaling solution, was mostly theory. He teamed up with the ‘corporate bitcoiners’ at the time to push for big blocks.

We (the UASF proponents) didn’t want to compromise on decentralization. We understood that a short-term solution (a blocksize increase) to save a few companies was not worth it. It was better to first try long-term solutions, as Bitcoin needed to be used for centuries, even if that meant (unfortunately) a few companies would have to go out of business.

The analogy I used at the time was internet’s scaling solution. In the early days of the internet there was a similar problem. There was too much traffic, and routers often were bottlenecks. The quick (and expensive) fix, was to replace routers with more capacity (blocksize increase equivalent). But instead, through scientific research, we got smart algorithms (deployed via firmware updates) that allowed existing routers (think of nodes) to have much better efficiency. This was a much cheaper and better solution. Bitcoin SegWit came forth out of scientific research.

Today, Bitcoin can be used as digital cash through Lighting. We got instant transactions, better than Roger’s zero conf transaction method at the time.