This month I will release the code. Not a white paper. Not a roadmap. Not a promise about what might exist someday. Code. Working systems. A Bitcoin-integrated banking framework. A Bitcoin-enabled SQL architecture. Deterministic cryptographic payment systems built around single-use keys, ECDH-derived addressing, and complete transaction traceability without public identity leakage. But those are merely components. The more important release is something I believe has never previously existed. A system for true digital scarcity. A system where possession matters. A system where transfer means transfer. A system where ownership is not represented by a token while the underlying asset remains infinitely reproducible. For decades we have accepted a false assumption about computing. We have assumed that digital information must always be copyable. We have assumed that duplication is an unavoidable property of digital systems. What if that assumption is wrong? What if possession can be transferred rather than duplicated? What if a digital object can move from Alice to Bob in a manner where Alice no longer possesses it? Not as a legal fiction. Not as a contractual obligation. As a cryptographic reality. If that can be achieved, then much of what we think we know about information security, digital ownership, intellectual property, confidential information, and electronic commerce must be reconsidered. The implications extend far beyond cryptocurrency. Far beyond NFTs. Far beyond digital collectables. The ability to create truly scarce digital goods changes the economics of information itself. This month people will not need to speculate about whether such a system can exist. They will be able to read the code themselves.

I am working toward releasing an open-source AI agent project by the end of this year. The aim is not to build another monolithic system competing in the usual “OpenAI versus Claude versus Gemini” framing. That model assumes that intelligence should be concentrated into a small number of enormous general-purpose systems operated from large data centres. I think there is another path. The project will explore an open environment of many specialized agents: individually trained, task-specific, economically accountable systems that can be created, improved, and owned by different people. Rather than one model attempting to do everything, the architecture is based on distributed knowledge, specialization, reputation, and competition. In this model, agents may be trained for narrow domains: law, medicine, engineering, accounting, software, research, education, logistics, personal assistance, verification, translation, and many others. Individuals or small teams could train agents around their own knowledge and experience. Those agents could then be paid for useful work, develop reputations, and compete on accuracy, reliability, cost, and trustworthiness. The goal is to create a market for specialized intelligence rather than a single centralized intelligence provider. This is about open-source AI as an ecosystem: many agents, many owners, many areas of expertise, and many routes to improvement. It is not intended to replace human knowledge with one giant black box. It is intended to let human knowledge be embedded, trained, tested, traded, and extended through specialized systems. The project will invite developers, researchers, domain experts, and individuals who want to build agents around real expertise. The important question is not which large company owns the most powerful model. The important question is how millions of smaller, specialized systems can cooperate, compete, verify one another, and create value in an open environment. That is the direction I intend to pursue.

$BSV Bond Short-Term Vanguard - The storm is coming.

It used to be “smash buy Bitcoin, never sell.” Now it’s „blobibulga blablabla” nobody understands anything anymore. It stinks

If it was easy, everyone would do it. If it was obvious, we’d already have it. But if you have the vision to dream of worlds that others can’t see and you’re willing work like a dog to make that dream a reality, then the sky’s the limit. Go to any casino and the crowds are thickest around the slots and tables, not the sportsbook. But when I got into the online gambling business in the mid-90s, bandwidth limitations meant all you could do online was bet on sports. It took years before casino games and poker were viable. But having run a tech incubator in Vancouver, I’d seen modem speeds double multiple times, so I knew it was only a matter of time before the tech allowed you to spin digital reels and throw digital dice. Which is why I was willing to basically sell everything I owned and move to the Caribbean where most of the industry was based. Given online gambling’s reliance on transferring digital value, I was an early adopter of Bitcoin and an advocate for its wider use in digital payments. I still believe Bitcoin’s ultimate value will come from utility, not speculative investing, but I’m also glad I bought as much of it as I did back when it was worth 30¢. I suspect a lot of other people wish they’d done the same. Successful founders and investors have the ability to spot diamonds where others see only rocks. Problem is, most of the time, it is a rock. The most successful hitters in baseball don’t even connect 40% of the time, but any entrepreneur would kill for a success rate one-fifth that size. The times I saw diamonds when the reality was rocks could be costly. Hell, even the times I successfully identified diamonds didn’t come free or easy. But win or lose, I was willing to go on making these educated guesses, and the successful ones more than made up for the failures. Who dares wins. So dream big. And keep swinging.

I know. It is generally me. I have a whole paid troll army. There is an industry worth about $25 million US dollars a year dedicated to attacking me and funding detractors. Literally. You do not spend $25 million US a year unless you regard someone as a serious threat. People keep trying to explain it away with theories about vocabulary, writing style, response times, or whatever the fashionable excuse happens to be this week. The simpler explanation is that there are organisations that have spent years and millions of dollars trying to discredit me. Nobody spends that sort of money because they are unconcerned. Nobody allocates that sort of budget because they think someone is irrelevant. You spend that sort of money because you believe the person matters.

He is a recovering crack addict that has now found a new addiction- it’s apparently called shit posting.

I created the systems that ran the first casino (legal and license) online and other things. Building on ideas. As for crypto - would not touch "crypto". I have scaled BSV and it will and and is being used. BSV is not "crypto".

Bitcoin's slump has overshadowed a much broader rout across the crypto market, with millions of coins now virtually worthless bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

🚨 NEW: Winklevoss twins back Zcash after bug scare.

Or it was coded all along 👀