White coats continue to not understand that ALL of their credibility was burned in the scamdemic years

So much 'trust us' commentary and zero technical advice i can research for myself. 🚩

I dont doubt that you could be right. Maybe im Mandela affected haha. Im only a GenXer, so maybe Boomers can say otherwise, but I remember growing up and it was the Zeitgeist that the majority believed space and travelling to the moon was just science fiction including NASA.. Only something changed in the 2000s where after lots of space tv shows that people believe in Nasa and space travel etc.

GM

Its hard to know the real Zeitgeist of the 1960s. I think the older generation new they were lies about the absurdity of going to the moon, especially if you see how bad the interview of Apollo crew was. Their body language says it all.

His Rice University speech was a huge joke

Well said! What a scam.

Exit strategy = Bitcoin + off grid communities and systems.

We need parallel commerce asap

Mentioned only one thing and I never asked for more, really.

They said that those supposed bits of fruit in organic OJ, doesn't come from

squeezing the fruit. It comes in packages as dried ingredient. They were adding it themselves to the mix.

What makes content valuable? It’s not agreement or validation. Valuable content does one of three things…it challenges an assumption you didn’t know you had, it connects ideas you hadn’t linked before, or it gives you a framework to think more clearly about something that matters. Most posts do none of these. They confirm what we already believe or distract us momentarily.

The test isn’t whether content feels good or gets engagement. The test is whether you’re different after reading it, even slightly. That’s the bar worth aiming for when you hit publish.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Gm ☕️

Science has fallen.

I've been doing some research on the biggest mistakes we Bitcoiners made as a community — and obviously we got very complacent over time.

Instead of listening to podcast hopium and alienating people with "have fun staying poor" narratives, we should've focused on game theory and patched up at least some of the holes.

It was always inevitable that Bitcoin was going to get attacked, and things like having close to 100% of nodes run on a single implementation was just silly in hindsight.

People are doing more harm than good when posting charts of hashrate going vertical without the context that 2 pools (Foundry and Antpool) are close to 50% of hashrate and for more than 98% of cases, pools, not miners decide which transactions get added to the blockchain.

You had most of the Bitcoin community cheering price over payment share; we welcomed ETFs as victory. Paper share rose, self-custody fell.

The entire community also cheered Square's surveilled "Bitcoin payments" where every payment generates identity-linked transaction data: buyer, location, device, and amount.

All transactions flow through Square/Cash App's KYC/AML perimeter, meaning both sides of the payment are verified.

That data fuels risk scoring, fraud models, blacklist propagation, and targeted marketing.

Exactly this surveillance value is Square's enduring moat, not the 1% fee.

We just got too complacent.

I'd say the 5 main mistakes we Bitcoiners made are:

1. Letting arbitrary data compete with money on the base layer (witness discount abetted it). For Medium-of-Exchange you need predictable fees; underpriced junk data is a Denial-of-Service subsidy.

2. Treating privacy as an "expert mode". That guarantees surveillance wins by default. Make privacy invisible and automatic.

3. Under-investing in operational safety (backups, recovery, liquidity UX). Normal users pick custodians when scared.

4. Relying on norms over policy. In a low Gross Consent Product world, policy beats culture. If your mempool policies are naïve, adversaries will price you out.

5. Ignoring perimeter levers (app stores, banks, clouds). If you don't plan redundant routes, the other side will plan your failure.

The uncomfortable truth is that Bitcoin's defense can't be "hope users pick hard mode".

Defaults decide outcomes.

If Bitcoin wants to be mass Medium-of-Exchange, privacy, finality, recoverability, and predictability must be invisible and automatic — and the perimeter must be treated as hostile by default.

Until then, paper wrappers will dominate, regulators will "clarify", and L1 will be priced as store-of-value with supervised access, not as everyday cash.

The good news: all of that is fixable — but only if it's designed, not preached.

You shorting? 👀