BTC Network Compliance Provider

17.9K posts

BTC Network Compliance Provider banner
BTC Network Compliance Provider

BTC Network Compliance Provider

@LowBtc

#Bitcoin Holder of Last Resort. "Came for the drugs stayed for the sound money"

the Moon 가입일 Mayıs 2017
1.1K 팔로잉2.1K 팔로워
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Alex Thorn
Alex Thorn@intangiblecoins·
“How Real is the Quantum Threat?” this was one of the best panels of the whole conference imo @reardencode @jamesob @cryptoquick @apruden08 each represented and defended their positions very well. and it had some great spicy moments 🌶️ full video from yesterday in vegas
English
14
27
169
25.1K
BTC Network Compliance Provider
sounds like Bitcoin Fraud Dept were asleep at the wheel???!!?! I'm hearing rumors that they let anyone join the Bitcoin fraud detection team by literally just downloading some open source software made by anonymous autists, no background check required! 😯😯😯
BTC Network Compliance Provider tweet media
English
0
0
0
41
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Sani | TimechainIndex.com
12 years old Casascius Coin worth 50 BTC just moved after 12 years, 20 BTC has been deposited to Kraken so far
Sani | TimechainIndex.com tweet media
English
1
4
56
3.8K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
ZachXBT
ZachXBT@zachxbt·
On January 10, 2026 at around 11 pm UTC a victim lost $282M+ worth of LTC & BTC due to a hardware wallet social engineering scam. The attacker began converting the stolen LTC & BTC to Monero via multiple instant exchanges causing the XMR price to sharply increase. BTC was also bridged to Ethereum, Ripple, & Litecoin via Thorchain. Theft addresses (2.05M LTC, 1459 BTC): bc1qluxw46r55wf3dnk9c652vrt4duadm3hpuktf86 bc1qpsmh26ja0fzzf286zulmt9eywujc2pggj40wzm ltc1qly43c2prj4c2e85dcspzpjd36jnapnenldnr70
English
1.1K
908
8.2K
2.7M
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Alex Gladstein 🌋 ⚡
Alex Gladstein 🌋 ⚡@gladstein·
I recently sat down with @balajis to record a @NS episode on Bitcoin, freedom, global economics, and how open-source code is changing society Really enjoyed our chat!
English
46
123
643
75.5K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Jameson Lopp
Jameson Lopp@lopp·
There were 0 Bitcoin obituaries published in 2025. RIP Bitcoin Obituaries!
Jameson Lopp tweet media
English
81
132
1.3K
122.8K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Eric Balchunas
Eric Balchunas@EricBalchunas·
$IBIT is the only ETF on the 2025 Flow Leaderboard with a negative return for the year. CT's knee-jerk reaction is to whine about the return but the real takeaway is that is was 6th place DESPITE the negative return (Boomers putting on a HODL clinic). Even took in more than $GLD which was up 64%. That's a really good sign long term IMO. If you can do $25b in bad year imagine the flow potential in good year.
Eric Balchunas tweet media
English
135
479
2.9K
998.5K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Mandrik
Mandrik@Mandrik·
@MrHodl Holding bitcoin and doing nothing is literally the hardest thing in the world.
English
8
7
142
2.3K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Megalithic.me
Megalithic.me@MegalithicBTC·
Megalithic.me tweet media
ZXX
1
1
1
85
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Brady Swenson
Brady Swenson@CitizenBitcoin·
Thanks to @TomerStrolight and @reardencode for the conversation. Here are some takeaways I had from both sides –please take exception to or expand on them in the replies. > Default settings in Bitcoin Core shape network behavior because most nodes run them > Local, custom relay policies (like in Knots) mainly affect the operator, not the broader network > Only a small number of nodes with permissive policies are needed to propagate transactions reliably through the network > Even massive Knots adoption couldn’t practically maintain the pre-Core-30 status quo, so running Knots amounts to signaling a vote against Core’s decision, how the decision was made, or any other reason a Knots-runner might have > Core devs see little value in keeping config options that don’t meaningfully impact propagation > Knots advocates emphasize node operator sovereignty and transparency over defaults > The removal of options in Core is seen by some as reducing user control > Spam resistance is limited at the mempool policy layer — miners will include any fee-paying data > OP_RETURN is considered less harmful than unprunable alternatives (fake pubkeys, P2PKH) > I didn’t get a clear answer as to “why 100kb?” – Citrea’s use case only requires a small increase, so why 100kb? Is this a slippery slope? > Critics worry about setting precedent by adapting Core policy to one project’s needs > Larger OP_RETURNs could burden mempools and node resources, raising fears of network bloat > The debate reflects a deeper tension: pragmatism (Core) vs. principle (Knots)
Brady Swenson@CitizenBitcoin

twitter.com/i/spaces/1YpJk…

English
13
2
33
8.2K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
BinaryWatch.org
BinaryWatch.org@BinaryWatchBot·
✅ coldcard ✅ blockclock ✅ lnd ✅ bitcoin_core ✅ sparrow ✅ green_qt ✅ wasabi ✅ joinmarket ✅ electrum ✅ core_ln ✅ specter ✅ seedsigner ✅ liana ✅ bitcoin_knots To see full results visit binarywatch.org 👇 ♥@coinkite
English
0
2
5
270
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Megalithic.me
Megalithic.me@MegalithicBTC·
I guess Spark is injecting code into X via a chrome extension, in order to replicate Nostr zaps on X? Seems awesome?! But will they get shut down? Usually platforms take a dim view of any kind of organized javascript injection coming from user browser extensions?
Megalithic.me tweet media
English
2
1
5
447
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Humanoid History
Humanoid History@HumanoidHistory·
The future of flight, 1901.
Humanoid History tweet media
English
1
19
76
7.9K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함
Marty Bent
Marty Bent@MartyBent·
Many won’t believe it, but the same will happen between now and 2034.
Marty Bent tweet media
English
19
24
360
30K
BTC Network Compliance Provider 리트윗함