BSV, Esq.

@VinceLaBido @GavinMehl @crashmoney_ All great points, not to mention – this legal matter ultimately forces someone to claim ownership over the wallets, which removes the privacy element of blockchain tech.

Lack of standing is a very strong argument, but the problem is there’s no one, presumably, to argue for it. Amicus can be risky especially with possible sabotage since you never really know the true ulterior motives. That’s why I believe lack of proper noticing stands a better chance. Not because it doesn’t have the same problem, a proper defense, but because it should be a reason that a judge should deny a default judgment. Sua sponte? A win on a technical is still a win. Especially when going into uncharted territory. We may be looking at this from the whole wrong perspective though. What if this is being done by the good guys who’ve actually lost their keys? Then, the rebuttal would be that they did have an opportunity to respond by activity on the address or “proving ownership.” But, “proving ownership” to whom? Salomon? Who TF are they to demand a response? Not judicial. Token holder has no legal obligation to respond. What of this is an “example” to everyone the inadequacies with a protocol that doesn’t already contemplate scenarios such as these?

@GavinMehl @VinceLaBido @crashmoney_ Yup, and this speaks on @CsTominaga point he has made recently — where control of keys ≠ owner of the wallet. Just as I can give my neighbor a key to my house, that does not mean ownership of the property has been transferred.

@BSV_Esq @VinceLaBido @crashmoney_ Yeah how does bringing wallet addresses to the police equal possession of keys? But a better question is who has standing to defend this?

@GavinMehl @VinceLaBido @crashmoney_ Not sure if this was the statute referenced in the matter, but the key word here would be “possession”. What defines “possession” as relates to a crypto wallet?

@GavinMehl @VinceLaBido @crashmoney_ It’s fascinating. I mean, I’m not a NY lawyer so not too familiar with NY local law but I would think the act of simply downloading the wallet addresses onto USBs, with no access to the keys, would not qualify as control.

@GavinMehl @VinceLaBido @crashmoney_ Furthermore, can dormant wallets really be considered abandoned and lost property? With a car, for example, it’s easy to determine - has the owner cared for it, driven it, where is it located etc. But for a crypto wallet, lack of transactions ≠ abandoned.

@VinceLaBido @crashmoney_ @BSV_Esq any thoughts?

Behold, the classic BTC mindset: “just HODL, it will go up forever.” 🖨️ Past performance does not guarantee future results. 📊 BTC has been advertised and promised as some infinite money glitch, but the moment it veers its head - you start to delusions such as this. 👇👇👇👇

@Bitcoin_Scales I hope I’m wrong 👌

@BSV_Esq This is just cope. Nothing has to crash FIRST.

Unfortunately, everything must crash before $BSV can rise. It will be adopted out of necessity. From the ashes of despair. Quite literally, the phoenix of crypto.

@abaines911 No, I’m not a $5 believer. Lower-end price discovery has been too battle-tested for $5 levels to be achieved, IMO.

@BSV_Esq $5 incoming you reckon?

@degrader93 I probably shouldn’t have spoken in certainty. Of course I could be wrong about everything. I’ve been wrong many times before and will be wrong many more times.

@BSV_Esq I don't think so.

@robert964492 It’s entirely possible, no doubt about it. Sounds like we can agree, however, that the current status quo of the crypto market is unsustainable and unhealthy.

Or, a better chain will emerge with better tech, less baggage, and a fresh token supply to work with. Bitcoin was a revolutionary invention. But it was far from perfect. Which is why it failed. At this point I think it’s more likely something better will come along. It’s still so early.

@Lokkisis Everything in crypto is still tied to BTC, so until the “Great Detethering” occurs, yeah $BSV will most likely fall with the rest of the market.

@BSV_Esq Bsv also need to crash before he rise right?

@CsTominaga And to add, it is oft the late scholar whose works are finally appreciated and earn the recognition it deserves. Too often, in human history, are we quick to ridicule and reject the present minds. Such is the fate of an author, I suppose.

It is one of the minor tragedies of modern life that a man may publish multiple Q1 papers on information theory, quantum dynamics, statistical geometry, and the mathematics of non-equilibrium systems, and yet still find himself cornered by half-literate evangelists explaining quantum computing with the confidence of a bishop discussing astronomy after three glasses of claret. The vulgar have an extraordinary faith in machinery they do not understand. They speak of “millions of qubits” with the breathless excitement earlier centuries reserved for alchemy and perpetual motion. One suspects that if Schrödinger himself returned and asked a few elementary questions about error correction, decoherence thresholds, or logical qubit stability, these people would accuse him of “not believing in the future.” What makes the whole affair so exhausting is not ignorance — ignorance is common and often charming — but the theatrical certainty of those who have mistaken marketing literature for physics. They repeat slogans from corporate press releases as medieval monks repeated Latin: reverently, rhythmically, and without the faintest comprehension of the underlying text. Meanwhile, those of us who have actually worked in information theory and quantum dynamics are expected to nod politely while technological astrologers explain that the laws of thermodynamics are apparently optional if enough venture capital is involved. The modern world does not fear expertise. It fears the expert who declines to participate in collective fantasy.

Any new episodes coming up for Proof of Claim? @AnilBharrat I already went through them all 😂

@RodSirloin @SendBSV Decent

Convinced my mom to get a tattoo

@theswansjr @The_xyzguy @CsTominaga @ExpressBSV @grok $BSV is the antithesis of $BTC. One focuses on building efficient, fair, and revolutionary tech. The other stares at a chart. One calls upon its community to build and innovate. The other demands stagnation. One is Bitcoin. The other is not. I know which side I’m on.

@The_xyzguy @CsTominaga @ExpressBSV @grok Wait and you can buy at at $10, then $5, then $2...

Bitcoin’s growth curve may be slowing, not stopping. If the power law continues: 1 BTC = $77K today 1 BTC = $1M in 8 years That’s a $923K gain. Sometimes the hardest work is simply not selling.

@robert964492 @CsTominaga I suppose my follow-up is: While I view blockchain technology as an excellent instrument for financial transactions, that utility alone is not disruptive enough to the status-quo to demand mass adoption. Just my 2 cents.

But that was my point. I was specifically making the distinction between proof and data storage. The chain only keeps a permanent record that the transaction took place and proof that the data involved existed at a certain time. But the raw data itself is not permanently stored on the blockchain. Logically, it doesn't make sense to put the full confidential document on a public ledger. Especially if you can get the same immutability from the blockchain without exposing the actual data or relying on paid archival nodes. There are numerous ways to do this.

I have been workshopping a specific utility-case for $BSV, specifically within the area of business transactions. I will explain below:

@OldCraig I’ve read a few cases in the US where lawyers have got in trouble for inputting Attorney-Client privileged information in open LLMs (ChatGPT). Since that data can technically be accessed by OpenAI, it was deemed a waiver, and no longer protected info. Trying to find a closed LLM

@BSV_Esq I think you have to anonymize client the sensitive data before it goes into the LLM but I'm a noob. That's just what smarter people have told me.

Anyone have any AI suggestions for the following: - Can assist with drafting, review of docs etc. - is closed system I.e. no risk of disclosure of client information - can be fed documents/info and retain knowledge - legal-based Should I just build my own LLM? If so, how?

@robert964492 @CsTominaga I understand your point, and it’s a fair one. But, I do disagree. The immutability of blockchains is what makes it so perfectly designed for an accurate, irrefutable record of not only data information, but also financial transactions.

If the data is confidential then the simplest solution is to just not put it on a public ledger to begin with. The "everything on chain" vision for Bitcoin is a bad use case for the blockchain. Its primary use case should just be p2p electronic cash. The blockchain should stay lean and act mainly as a coordination layer for different datasets rather than trying to capture all data on one network. That's not practical and there's really no reason to do it. If someone wants the immutability the blockchain offers they can still get it without putting the raw data itself on chain.

@anil_bharrat @Daniel__Street Could also just be whoever is the social media guy isn’t in the know. Doesn’t necessarily damn RockWallet as a whole. Devils advocate 🤷‍♂️

@Daniel__Street Definitely BTC supporter, otherwise they would have signalled support for BSV by specifying “BTC is hovering around $80k”.

Are Rockwallet BSV supporters or BTC?