T.J.Burns
134 posts

T.J.Burns
@bitwikidev
Documenting Digital Liberty-Senior Editor @ https://t.co/BE3dvgnSUb
United States انضم Nisan 2025
173 يتبع30 المتابعون

RFK JR - Many don’t realize, the Chickenpox Vaccine Causes shingles Epidemics
“When the CDC was thinking about mandating the chickenpox vaccine for your children, they did a study.
The person they hired to do that study was a scientist named Gary Goldman, who did a long-term study in California.
What he found is that if you give the chickenpox vaccine, mass vaccinate, it stops chickenpox, but causes shingle epidemics later on; which is 20x deadlier.
Despite those studies, we mandated for American children in this country, but in Europe they don’t.
If you go to the British National Health Service website right now, you can read that it will say, “We do not recommend chickenpox vaccines because it causes shingles epidemics later on… and that’s the problem.
(Check the link here: nhs.uk/vaccinations/c…)
You can’t say this product is going to prevent this particular disease, but you have to look at the long-term implications.”
English

@JasonBassler1 Looks like this may come down to research in the field followed by peer review
English

Yes, the CTIA's April 29, 2026 Wireless Affordability Tracker shows real prices for typical unlimited wireless plans fell over 10% last year (35% over 5 years, inflation-adjusted).
FCC Chairman Carr and the Trump admin have advanced spectrum auctions, restored auction authority, and cut red tape to speed infrastructure and boost competition—policies credited by supporters for sustaining these declines.
Your personal plan may not have updated yet; offers vary by carrier.
English

The Villages mostly are non Floridians from the rust belt [ created by government in concert with wall street] living on land that once made Florida famous for citrus until Nafta [Clinton] sent the profits south of the border. It is now semi famous for very high STD infection in the elderly. Boomers and Trump seem like a good fit.
English

Nakamoto consensus is a name applied to perception, @consensus2026 is a fictional extract of that perception
The real consensus is on a cloud server.
English

@EricLDaugh Yeah, I almost forgot about Epstream, or Epstein,
Cause jokes on a beach, Trump real crime and hijacking bitcoin for the benefit of the Rothchilds

English

Breaking: DOJ indicts James Comey for the second time justthenews.com/node/179405?ut…
English

@kurtwuckertjr Jovial story from that guy, how you note the premine that never happened , but Exaggeration on time frame, to be one of the cool kids, is offset by the message that people in the intelligence community routinely dispose of hard drives in dumpsters.
English

US Intelligence premined bitcoin for 3+ years, according to uncontested statements from spooks at the Lizard Conference.
Pledditor@Pledditor
🤨🤔
English

My 14-yr-old truck never prompts me to enter my email address or download a software update. Nor does it lock up if I open the door while still rolling or beep scoldingly at me if I come too close to another car. I'm never in trouble for breaking its rules. I get to be in charge.
Pubity@pubity
Every new car in the U.S. will be required by law to have tech that puts constant surveillance on the driver by 2027. AI in your car will determine if you're sober and fit to drive, automatically turning off the vehicle if it determines you're a danger on the road.
English

reddit.com/r/occult/comme…
Peter J. Carroll one of the originators of chaos magic, has left the building
Ad Astra
bon voyage
English

@kurtwuckertjr @SeanieQdup @DHSgov Amir Taaki is on the record ,stating that Satoshi was a Windows developer. He is many things, but this is a field he understands.
English

@SeanieQdup @DHSgov That’s fine. Read the article. None of them are Satoshi.
Here’s the article specifically about Len and Hal
kurtwuckertjr.com/post/finding-s…
English

@Truthcoin That is something right there. I don't know if I can unread it.
English

Important: I've also devised a way that some can *invest* in this hardfork, now, before the fork-date, in August:
- Satoshi has 1.1M coins in the so called "patoshi" pattern.
- We will be manually reassigning some of these coins (fewer than half) to investors today.
This will no doubt be a controversial decision. But I think it is necessary, and in fact, ideal:
- The pure fork, is a problem, because it leaves collaborators with no way to "get involved" ahead of time.
- This leaves the fork a "zombie project" -- until it launches.
- Thus, it is harder to ship the fork as a "finished project" -- with all of the work completed in advance.
- Ironically, that would centralize the project, and encourage dev-capture.
To avoid seedy grifter-style investment-promotion activities, I mostly do not mention this. But it is possible, for high-quality investors (ie, accreditted+).
Plus, it must be disclosed, for full transparency.
English

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.
English

@cryptorebel_SV Lacking definitive statistics, but
Most Jewish oligarchs are Russian and most pedophiles are Christians

English

@bitwikidev That narrative works well in favor of the jew capitalist oligarch pedophiles.
English

It is always charming to watch a problem be solved by carefully avoiding the solution.
There exist lattice-based constructions, hash-based signatures, and other quantum-resistant schemes—some of them, quite inconveniently, resting on assumptions more conservative and structurally robust than those underpinning ECDSA itself. One might imagine that, in a moment of earnest concern for “security,” these would be the natural candidates.
And yet, they are not the ones being selected.
Pause on that.
In all this breathless discussion about securing "Bitcoin" BTC, about safeguarding assets, about defending the system from theoretical adversaries, the algorithms being proposed are not the most robust available—even within the very class being invoked. They are not the ones with the strongest classical assurances. They are not the ones that reduce reliance on brittle assumptions or implementation fragility.
They are, rather awkwardly, weaker in a classical sense.
So one is left with a rather delicate question: if the goal were truly to increase security, why not choose the most secure options available?
Especially when the supposed threat—the great spectre invoked to justify all of this—remains entirely unproven in any practical form.
Remove that spectre, and what remains is quite stark: a proposal to replace a well-understood, extensively analysed system with something demonstrably less secure against the attacks that actually exist.
It is at this point that one must resist the temptation to call it an accident.
For systems are rarely degraded by mistake. They are, far more often, adjusted in ways that serve purposes politely left unstated.
And so one observes, with a certain detached amusement, that in the name of security, something less secure is proposed; in the name of prudence, something speculative is prioritised; and in the name of progress, something demonstrably inferior is advanced.
It would be absurd, were it not so deliberate.
One is almost compelled to admire the elegance of it: to argue for protection while quietly selecting vulnerability, and to do so with such conviction that the audience applauds the performance rather than examining the script.
Think about why that might be.
English









