"plus, this would require a government that can do IT" haha, best punchline.

satoshi already covered all this shit in his design anyway.

that's why there is a block subsidy, to cover the gap in initial adoption where fees would be small due to small numbers of transactions in blocks. he even anticipated the general concept of layer 2 systems like lightning taking the load off the chain and causing such small blocks.

it's mostly shitcoiners who don't get it that bitcoin having small blocks is not a problem. when you consider that the reward for a block solution right now amounts to close to 1/3 of a million dollars, the incentive to mine is plenty sufficient for people to maintain a large amount of hardware to do it.

one thing i can say is that this margin is thin. the difference between a successful solo miner on the large scale, and an unsuccessful one, that bleeds money, is not a wide one. the market is very competitive. advantages like privileged access to new hardware with better performance or even geographical location as relates to the fulfillment of such hardware purchases or network latency compared to competitors are quite important and in no way reduce the security of the chain. they simply make it "hard" to be a successful bitcoin miner, since so many factors are at play.

the price level of bitcoin has consistently maintained a level that has been sufficient for an ongoing increase in hash power, and thus a constant escalation of the lower bound of what would be required to successfully mount a malicious attack on the chain. i personally think that is because its value proposition, as hard money, is incontrovertible, and as a result, demand for it is maintained consistently at a level that keeps the miners in a tight but sufficient position for actually making income from it and staying in the black. if they are careful, and well informed.

yeah, if i were to say what it's ulterior motive was, it was promoting yet more ordinal style shitcoinery on bitcoin, to puff up the block sizes and fees per block.

literally some kind of promotion of spamming bitcoin.

this is what the LLM said when i asked it whether this article even picks holes in bitcoin's security:

No, the article **does not make specific claims** about Bitcoin’s consensus mechanism having weaknesses in its security model.

The text is a general discussion on **security budgeting and economic incentives**, using examples from various systems (which may include blockchain or similar decentralized networks), but it does **not analyze Bitcoin specifically** or point out any concrete weaknesses in its consensus or security model.

In short:

- The article uses the concept of economic incentives as an example, possibly drawing on ideas related to Bitcoin.

- However, **it doesn’t directly critique or point out flaws** in Bitcoin’s consensus or security design.

- Any mention of Bitcoin is likely general and not detailed enough to be considered a critique or analysis of its weaknesses.

---

TL;DR the article doesn't even assert that bitcoin's security is vulnerable. it just uses it as part of a general, extremely verbose discussion about how you need to pay enough attention to network security in general, but specifically to decentralized protocols.

no. fucking. shit.

this was practically my initial impression from skimming through the text and getting tired of its lack of focus or attempt to actually make a point.

it's waffle, i can't even begin to describe how utterly unfocused the text is as regards to a criticism of bitcoin's security

not even scientific papers lack an abstract at the top that summarises the text.

i was feeling this urge to feed it to an LLM to write one for me but then i thought better of doing that because of the lack of credibility of the user who dropped the link.

there is terrible structure to this document, i can't tell what it's digging at. apart from saying that bitcoin fee rates will kill bitcoin because they don't grow enough.

without some substantive summary of how that can happen, all i get is scroll scroll scroll ok what's the point

i couldn't tell what the stupid text was even trying to propose.

and it is so friggin long there's no way i'm reading it without a bit of newspaper style journalistic structure.

The last update to Knots was in March... Sounds like this is an Umbrel-specific issue.

I don't trust any sausages not made by a delicatessen locally that can confirm what they ground up in there.

Users can verify their balance and transactions independently.

— Satoshi Nakamoto

NEW: Five 🇺🇸 U.S. Senators are raising concerns over the potential risks of crypto-backed mortgages. On July 24, 2025, Senators Jeffrey Merkley, Elizabeth Warren, Chris Van Hollen, Maxie Hirono, and Bernie Sandwrs sent a letter to Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director William Pulte, questioning his June 25 order for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to consider crypto assets as eligible for mortgage applications. 🤔

I'm old enough to remember the

"bitcoin can never become a store of value or investible asset class as it has no liquidity" argument.

A 9 billion USD trade was just executed and the price of bitcoin is now pumping.

On a Saturday.

Wall street bros brains are breaking right now.

Your fren at 10k bitcoin.

"Bro, it's a Ponzi."

At 25k bitcoin.

"Bro you should sell, these prices are crazy."

At 58k bitcoin

"Bro wtf are you going to do after that huge crash down to 58k? I told you it was a Ponzi and to sell!”

At 100k bitcoin

"Bro, way too speculative, no way I'm touching it, you should definitely sell."

At 123k bitcoin.

"Bro, far too volatile, you should sell if you still have any left."

150k bitcoin

"Bro............

Optimizes for engagement, and you'll get content that is generally pessimistic.

Optimize for zaps, and you'll get content that's generally a lot more positive.

⚡️🚨 NEWS - XRP dumping ?

Chris Larsen, co-founder of Ripple, sent $175M of XRP on exchanges.

The XRP price is touching its highest point in months.

A windfall for offloading onto retail? That, at least, is the accusation of some XRP holders.

Me after selling Bitcoin to buy 🍇 this Fall.

The Normies are Big Mad that Bitcoin works

The Bitcoiners are Big Mad that I used Bitcoin

This retard on CNBC : "I do not own bitcoin. I'd rather have an iPhone than a landline.”

Bitcoin is boring, XRP is exciting. I'm balls deep in this world changing token now. Garglinghouse is for Freedom ❤️