Yes. I use PrimalDamus frequently
You know the epoch times is the Falun Gong lunatics, right?
Don’t see anything racist or “anti-racist” about these crayons. It’s just a full spectrum of human skin tones.
Yep. That and Microstrategy BEEN the US strategic reserve…
The ETF people were never going to buy and self custody real #bitcoin without a painful and formative catalyzing event.
The ETFs will likely be that painful and formative catalyzing event…
"I don't think by default [Bitcoin] is going to fix much, especially if it continues the path we're on now, in which I feel like people's focus has turned entirely towards adoption by large financial institutions, rather than the fundamental promise that it offers. We need to be self-critical if we're to actually get anywhere." - Ahmed
What are your thoughts on adoption by large institutions, ETFs, etc? Is mainstream adoption via this mechanism losing sight of the freedom promoting qualities of #Bitcoin? Our latest 🔽
https://v.nostr.build/87gJ.mp4
https://progressivebitcoiner.com/tpb72-shifting-paradigms-in-the-middle-east-with-ahmed-gatnash/
The people buying into the ETF were never going to acquire self custody bitcoin without an extremely painful catalyzing event. The EFTs will likely be that event…
I am interested in this. I have the TestFlight Green app but I don’t have this feature. How do I get it? I’d really like to try Lightning in Green!
Bruh, this man nostr:npub18jgxqshg38cgzcv43zvqhnc7hjn223psy2kkmkpqt2azd9thyy4sxjc5gt been going HARD with the memes 🤙🏿⚡️💜🧡
nostr:note1kdn82kyqddepyuujwny5tex9k327genq39r9e39fpc07hymyyjgsm0d8hg
OMG 😆
Love it! I def agree with this perspective - high fees or catalyzing event that drives demand will push us to the best solutions. However, I guess I question whether this believe is just that, a belief, which we simple hope is true….
I’m with it bro! Awesome work 😁
How are you seeing bitcoin scaling as you’re making this?
All the chatter now of fees being too high and Lightning being “broken” how do you see bitcoin really getting into the hands of people to need it and being useable thereafter for their needs?
nostr:note1pdkdmhpjl50th8vhle286jtz0hsfljkw835fm7vx839j94685rqs6jx6w7
Anyone have thoughts on this? It’s been seriously bugging me a for a while.
#AskNostr
#Plebchain
#Bitcoin
If the mass citizens can not afford self custody it doesn’t really matter tho. The bank fails and more fractional tokens will be printed and the masses will experience inflation but still use them because they can’t afford any alternative.
This is why I question whether if bandwidth and storage continue to progress exponentially we may arrive a point where a bitcoin network with radically expanded blocksize can be maintain in decentralized fashion for the same or less cost than it is today.
This hinges on a technological assumption but if the assumption is correct, I don’t see why decentralization and scalability have to be opposing over the mid-long term.
**Yes, Citrea is actually real 🤯**
Citrea is a massive change to the Bitcoin ecosystem by allowing a massive increase in transaction throughput on Bitcoin as well as full EVM compatibility. Let's break down what that actually means in approachable language.
A lot of the terminology with things like "zk rollups" can be confusing, so I'll do my best to simplify things here.
**Zero-knowledge ("ZK") here isn't for privacy, it's for scaling/verification**
A lot of confusion comes from the term "zero-knowledge" often being conflated with privacy-preserving. In the case of zk here, it's being used for it's ability to succinctly (read: in a tiny amount of data) prove something is true and allow anyone to verify the claim without knowing every piece of data used in the proof.
**Citrea is a validity rollup that leverages zk proofs to reduce its on-chain footprint**
This means that the amount of data needing to be published to Bitcoin's base layer is miniscule (just a small zk proof) compared to the amount of data off-chain (the entire state of the Citrea blockchain), and is easily verified on almost any device.
Citrea validators "batch" transaction on the Citrea chain and publish a single, small proof that summarizes the change in Citrea chain state since the last published state and inscribes it into a Bitcoin transaction (yes, similar to those inscriptions). This proof will only verify properly if the validator is honest, allowing anyone on the network to prove whether or not the proof published is valid.
More on validity rollups here from @lightcoin:
[https://bitcoinrollups.org](https://bitcoinrollups.org/)
**Citrea enables EVM-style smart contracts w/o changes to Bitcoin**
While you may have a vitriolic hatred for all things Ethereum (for legitimate or illegitimate reasons), the ability to create complex, Turing-complete smart contracts on Bitcoin without needing the base layer to fully store, parse, and validate those smart contracts feels like the best of both worlds to me.
This can enable things like AMMs (think Uniswap) to function with actual Bitcoin as the currency involved. The possibilities are practically limitless.
**Citrea is "trust-minimized," not "trustless"**
While this may feel semantic, I think it's an important distinction to make. Citrea changes the trust model from a federated multisig (a la Liquid) where you have to trust that a majority of participants remain honest to one where as long as a single network participant is honest funds cannot be confiscated or frozen.
As long as one individual validator remains honest, no other validator can confiscate pegged-in funds or mess with them in any way. Additionally, any validator acting maliciously will be subject to slashing (losing their own Bitcoin via the challenge-response protocol in BitVM) and thus have a financial incentive to be honest unless they know for sure that every single validator on the network will allow them to be malicious.
**Citrea would be even better with covenants**
Yes, I'm going to mention covenants 😅 Part of the minor trust required in Citrea can be reduced even further with covenants in Bitcoin:
https://docs.citrea.xyz/future-research/trustless-settlement
Additionally an opcode that fully verifies zk proofs directly on Bitcoin (i.e. not via BitVM) would allow a completely trustless zk rollup, but deciding on a proof to enshrine in Bitcoin's consensus layer is very unlikely at this point.
**Conclusion**
I'm insanely excited for this to be fully open-sourced and usable on testnet, and will share updates as I see them along with testing this out ASAP.
Special thanks to @0x_orkun for giving me a sneak peak and letting me contribute to the docs, helped me have a much better understanding of what Citrea really is! I'd highly recommend reading through their docs if you want to better grasp all of the ins and outs:
https://docs.citrea.xyz/technical-specs/readme
If you see something that could be improved in the docs, be sure to open an issue or submit your own PR, as the docs are open source themselves!
Does this help with scaling self-custody to the global masses?
How does #bitcoin scale really tho? Like if the current solutions like Lightning cannot scale self custody to the masses, do we invariably fall back into fractional reserve - with a couple of bitcoiners traded in as the new masters in a few places here and there?
I am asking because thinking about this seems to always lead to back to big blocker logic. Like I’m not talking about Bitcoin Cash, I’m talking about Moore’s law scaling to where a decentralized network can be run with blocks several orders of magnitude larger with the standard of widely accessible consumer compute. At such a point, if we reach it, does an expansion of blocksize start to make sense?
We certainly should not sacrifice bitcoin’s decentralization, but does that actually require Bitcoin being locked into the storage and bandwidth standard of 2008 as we progress into the future?
Thoughts?
#AskNostr
#Plebchain
#DeepThoughts
She’s definitely holding a bloody crystknife out of frame
I’m trynna capture DISMAL VIBES lol. Surplus of that out here