I have yet to see a major bitcoin bear market where there wasn’t something deeper happening behind the scenes. Just saying.

We found the WORST performing BTC treasury company. Nakamoto bought ~$679 MILLION of BTC at an average price ~$118K - and held it all the way down. They’ve lost about $224 Million in less than a year, selling only 284 BTC at ~$70K 3 months ago. Now, they’re down over 35% on their BTC holdings, and their stock price is down 99.4% from $1,000 to only $5.60.

BREAKING: New Bitcoin Fork I am helping create a **new Bitcoin Hardfork** -- dropping this August, called "eCash". - Your coins will split. For example, if you have 4.19 BTC, then you will get 4.19 eCash. - You may sell your eCash -- or keep it. Or ignore it! Vegas: - Yes, I will be in Vegas next week. - No, I won't mention this, on stage -- (that would be rude). Our L1 Node... - is a near-copy of Bitcoin Core. - is Sha256d mined. - forks via a one-time difficulty-reset -- to its minimum value. (So, mining will be crazy at first.) - Yes, we will change the seed nodes, the name, the network magic, etc. Codewise, the L1 will remain compatible with Bitcoin Core: - We will continue to merge their changes (even the bad ones). - The L1 will activate Bip300/301 via CUSF -- the core untouched soft fork. So, no lines of code will be changed, on the L1. - The activation client will be published periodically (link below). - We will do several bug bounty contests this summer. - The client will be frozen 30 days prior to the fork. Yes, there will be Drivechains: - We have 7 in developement right now. - Users can also submit their own. - Drivechain is a vision of "competing L2s" -- this avoids the "dev capture" problem. - These L2s are all Merged Mined. Miners automatically get free $. - Our L2s are already capable of planetary scale, and onboarding 8 billion users. - We also have a zCash-like L2, with strong privacy. - Other L2s: Truthcoin (Prediction Markets), CoinShift (Decentralized Exchange), BitAssets (NFT etc), BitNames (Identity), Photon (Quantum Resistant). Unlike BCH (the 2017 fork): - There is no "Bitcoin" in the name. New name, new brand. - You are getting advanced warning (4 months). - We are replaying all txns (at first). We will release a coin-splitter tool. - This is a permanent & sustainable fix to Bitcoin's problems (instead of a 1 MB to 8 MB temporary fix). - Back in 2017, the BTC tech stack was strong, and expectations for Lightning were strong. Today, it is the reverse. Video to follow.

thats not what happened, we got paid out shares as if they were valued at $1.12 when they were actually worth .30 So we got paid 1/4th the 3rd party valuations

This is basically the campaign I advised the BSV group to embrace. We ran with this with HandCash in particular. We got to 150,000 users as a BSV company with $0 spent on user acquisition. Let that sink in.

Craig Wright chose to participate. He was the one sending legal threats and copyright takedowns to COPA and anyone hosting the Bitcoin whitepaper, claiming he owned the IP as “Satoshi.” COPA didn’t hunt him down — they sued defensively to shut down the harassment and get a clear court ruling that he is not Satoshi. He could have ignored it or settled. Instead he spent years and millions fighting it with armies of lawyers and “evidence” because a win would have given him massive leverage to sue devs, exchanges, and critics for billions. He wanted the court’s authority when he thought it would rubber-stamp his claim. Now that the same court exposed his forgeries and lies “on a grand scale,” suddenly it’s all “shadow pedo puppet masters”? If the system is illegitimate, why did he bet everything on it?

Grok has some interesting things to say about this: The license is deliberately not fully permissionless — that’s the entire point. It is 100 % permissive on the official BSV chain and 100 % closed everywhere else. That is not accidental or hypocritical; it is an explicit design choice to keep a high-performance, enterprise-grade node codebase (Teranode) from being weaponised by bad actors to launch forks, scams, or rival chains that would confuse users and erode network effects. The protocol itself remains permissionless — anyone can still implement the Bitcoin whitepaper rules from scratch under a clean MIT license if they want. This license only governs this specific codebase. Calling that “permissioned blockchain” is like calling a restaurant’s proprietary kitchen recipe “permissioned cooking”. You’re still free to cook whatever you want; you just can’t use their exact recipe and ingredients and then claim you’re serving the same dish in a different restaurant. People trying to “worm their way out” of the restriction are indeed either clowns or dishonest. The text is brutally clear: use outside the defined BSV chain = outside the license. No ambiguity, no loopholes, no “but muh open source spirit” escape hatch. If you don’t like the restriction, write your own node or use older, unrestricted Bitcoin SV code. Simple.

Yep This is why coretards are today's bigblockers They just don't care about whether running a node is easy to run Bcashers make these exact arguments