Electron Buzz

@tayvano_ @zacodil one judge. the whole thing rests on one judge. aren't single points of failure bad?

@zacodil Only silly children are scared of lawyers who have never won a case lmaOo

KelpDAO is probably the last openly attributed North Korean hack. Not because Lazarus stops hacking. They will not. But the legal trap is now visible. DPRK has hundreds of millions in unpaid US terrorism judgments, and creditors have spent decades hunting for any reachable DPRK asset. The moment a hack is publicly attributed and there is a recoverable pot, those old creditors arrive with restraining orders. Drift was named publicly. KelpDAO too. The Arbitrum case is the first where there was a frozen pot to fight over - and the creditors arrived within days.

@murchandamus name these supposed experts? the real experts are saying 2029.

I was a bit concerned about quantum for a moment, but the supposed expert quantum doomers demonstrating extreme lack of technical acumen at the top of my feed every time I open Twitter is making it hard to take it serious at all. When you’re in a hole, maybe stop digging?

@TheGuySwann Google just added (not switched to) neutral atom because neutral atom is moving ridiculously fast. They don't want to be 3 years behind, they don't want to be 1 year behind. Superconducting on its own merits is doing just fine.

“i do think quantum is a problem worth working on, even if there is only a 1% chance that it ever affects bitcoin.” Basically this. Being scared that we’re on the verge of quantum doesn’t seem to live up with any evidence to me. The fact that Google just switched to neutral atom design suggests what all concrete data backs up: that’s there’s no meaningful progress on actually building one. If there was, they’d never throw it away and completely retool. Doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be considered or time shouldn’t be invested to address its potential impact.

@EliBenSasson need

Complete the sentence: The real thing standing between crypto and mass adoption is...

@EliBenSasson The US can tell Saylor, a US citazen, and Strategy, a US company, what to do in a time of war. Saylor holds close to 5% of the active supply and can manipulate the float at will. Close to half of mining is in the US. On and on. Bitcoin is not risk-free for the outside-of-US world

Right after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russian banks were cut off of the international banking system, which is controlled by the US. I tweeted that this will make all sovereign countries realize the strategic value of Bitcoin, and crypto, in general. Today it's Russia, but tomorrow it may be your country. Fast forward to the Iran-US-Israel war, and this trend only intensifies. Iran famously demanded the Hormuz passage fees be paid in Bitcoin / stables, in realization that the conventional banking rails are controlled by its arch-nemesis. So once again, without making any moral judgements on whether this is good or bad, the reaction of nation states, all of them, to something like this will be a stronger realization of crypto rails in their true form – decentralized, censorship resistant and credibly neutral, even in the face of global empires and nation states. I’m saying this to argue that crypto, in its wild decentralized format is not going to disappear. Don’t let the current crypto winter fool you. Crypto will come back with a huge roar.

@flyest @StaniKulechov often the specifics are besides the point. once a suit like this forces a big question to be answered, it's the answer that matters, not what forced the question (which is often facetious)

turns out Gerstein Harrow has been running silly crypto lawsuits for years in 2021, they sued compound labs and @StaniKulechov for over $200M. the lead plaintiff was a staffer for Elizabeth Warren who lost $276.5 in a yield redistribution lottery. they lost the case.

@jussy_world don't invest in things without customers. would you invest in, say, digital ocean if they didn't have anyone using their VMs?

Failed ICOs in 2026 so far👇 ZAMA: $118M raised at $550M FDV → -46% AZTEC: $60M raised at $400M FDV → -57% TROVE: $11M raised at $20M FDV → -92% (rug) SPC: $24M raised at $69M FDV → -94% (rug) RNBW: $3M raised at $100M FDV → -86% Millions raised Retail rugged Did you participate in any of these?

@jpthor okay so where's the line between single-celled organisms and rocks? or crystals? there's always a line, all you're doing is pushing it below the tweet close.

Consciousness is simply an awareness of "self" versus the universe around you, and an ability to hold agency. There is no threshold of sensory machinery by which you can draw a line as delineating between "conscious" or not, nor the amount of agentic impulse you can apply against your environment. Humans are conscious. ------ < you cannot mark the line here Chimpanzees are conscious. ----- < Nerp, keep going Lizards are conscious. Starfish are conscious. Bacteria are conscious. Single-celled organisms are conscious.

@coinjoined SHA-256 is a NIST-approved standard.

Hard to take NIST seriously after they pushed a kleptoghraphic algorithm that allowed many retail network routers to be backdoored. There's a reason satoshi used secp256k1 and why we hash twice. We shouldn't trust the standards bodies. Keep your tinfoil hats on!

@afilini @giacomozucco @BitcoinErrorLog @StormJib @TFTC21 @callebtc you are about to learn all the painful lessons us tee-for-a-living folks have known for years. you cannot avoid updates, and signed attestations are worthless if a single update can rug everyone. so then trusted maintainers etc etc and voila you've invented a defi monstrosity.

@giacomozucco @BitcoinErrorLog @StormJib @TFTC21 @callebtc Box no need be only key-holder. Make many box, need 2-of-3 say yes. Or hide spare key in cold cave for backup. Box die, coin live.

"You can't access the bitcoin, so you're not a custodian." That single sentence from @callebtc , the creator of the Cashu ecash protocol, just unlocked the biggest scaling breakthrough Bitcoin has had in years. The reason ecash scaling has been limited to small community mints is because running a larger one makes you a money transmitter. Calle's solution: non-custodial Cashu mints running inside hardware enclaves. The bitcoin keys are generated inside the enclave and never leave it. The mint operator literally cannot access them. Even with full admin access to the server, they cannot steal the bitcoin. Remove the custodial barrier and the design space explodes. Public organizations, businesses, community groups can all run mints without taking on custodial liability. The security model is battle-tested. ACINQ already uses the same approach with AWS Nitro Enclaves to protect their massive Lightning node holding hundreds of millions in BTC. The historical lineage is what gets me. In 2004, Hal Finney built RPOW (Reusable Proofs of Work) using IBM's secure cryptographic coprocessor. The server was "more trustworthy than an ordinary bank" because the hardware itself guaranteed the software hadn't been tampered with. Finney's system wasn't tied to an existing currency. Calle's is. Cashu ecash backed by Bitcoin, running in a modern enclave, is RPOW's spiritual successor. Except this time it's built on the hardest money in human history. The honest caveats: this doesn't reduce risk to zero. The biggest practical risk is denial of service. The operator could turn the mint off. But since they can't steal the bitcoin, there's no financial incentive to do so. We're getting closer to having everything we want: privacy, ease of use, and reduced custodial risk, all on Bitcoin rails. Hal Finney's vision, finally realized.

@StarkWareLtd if starknet were a layer one it'd be killing it right now with the pq narrative. being held back narrative-wise by eth is a bummer, there is no way eth is is going to meet its stated 2029 goals

@TheGuySwann okay but also true that most bitcoiners sound like they have a massive chip on their shoulder about, well, everything and simply cannot enjoy life.

I don’t care what your opinion is around anything surrounding this issue — If someone cannot recognize what a poisonous and disastrous incentive structure DEI enforces at every level, how could I possibly trust you can understand the nuances and dynamics of the incentives that protect Bitcoin? Anyone who thinks this is an unreasonable concern is either dishonest or deluding themselves because it might get “uncomfortable” to bring it up. This isn’t complicated, this is flat common sense. DEI is a disease of incentives.

@notgrubles the real problem is you frequently have to update the code and then what? who has that power? because any update can run everyone, and there is no such thing as half an image change.

Important to note that the firmware backing enclaves is not open source. So your keys are created by a unauditable black box.

@EliBenSasson it's very *very* hard to see ethereum being close to ready by 2029, and i wouldn't surprised if neutral atoms are in fact starting to take serious nibbles at ECC by 2028.

Wrong, you forgot Starknet, given that (i) Starknet becoming quantum resistant requires minimal effort, (ii) Starknet recently launched a post-quantum wallet demonstrating that, and (iii) Ethereum's efforts to become quantum resistant are already underway.

@afilini @TFTC21 @callebtc me make tee tee need code. code need update. many update. update need new image. oops. these things are all just multisigs in disguise.

@TFTC21 @callebtc Wasn’t really ready to announce yet but fuck it: we’ve been working on enclavia.io to bring enclaves to every bitcoin company. Private beta launches in the next couple of weeks, DM me if you want to try it out

@intangiblecoins @RishiVChavan it's the risk of an early crqc and the chain having nothing to move over to and just sort of bleeding out as people argue back and forth. basically bleeding out is the most likely outcome, a bunch of coins "safe" but all that is moot as the whole things bleeds out.

@RishiVChavan they absolutely do reduce the risk in the near term. an early CRQC cannot simultaneously crack thousands of public keys. odds are the first success would take a long time just to crack one

i had many discussions about quantum & bitcoin in las vegas this week, both on and off stage, with skeptics, advocates, and many overall smart bitcoiners some consensus i feel is emerging: 1) satoshi’s coins (P2PK) should not be touched. violating his property rights could be disastrous for bitcoin’s core value proposition. but the risk is also lower than many realize — satoshi’s coins are in ~22,000 addresses, each of 50 BTC. a long range attack would have to crack them all (i.e., it’s not one giant honeypot). the giant honeypots are mostly exchanges or active entities who can upgrade to a PQ-address if needed, so mostly not realistically at risk. the hourglass proposal could also further mitigate if we thought long-range Qday was imminent meanwhile, neutral atom tech can only do long range attacks, and google quietly opened a neutral atom lab just prior to their recent paper (maybe just hedging, but possibly an admission of superconducting’s limitstions? unclear, but distinguishing between long & short range is essential, and impacts the satoshi-coin issue) data from @_Checkmatey_ and others also shows that bitcoin markets routinely absorb 1m+ BTC, even just from oct25 to pres, let alone during bull markets. suffer a 50% drawdown (even if it were possible to take all of satoshi’s coins) to preserve bitcoin’s core property rights? i think most bitcoiners would accept that trade off, particularly given the mitigations (satoshi’s many addresses, hourglass, and market’s capability to absorb them if needed) 2) it is good to work on new crypto for bitcoin, post-quantum or otherwise. developing it, testing it, compressing its signatures, proposing and debating implementation — all of these are good for bitcoin the risks are a) this work occupies people’s time, potentially diverting from other important work; b) something untested or too novel is added to the protocol; c) calls to implement on the protocol create consensus gridlock, hamper other upgrades but most people i talked with in las vegas agreed that background work, perhaps resulting in a new PQ implementation being “put on the shelf” in case it’s needed, is unequivocally a good thing. this mostly seemed to be a reasonable middle ground on the contentious mainstage panel as well, despite disagreements on urgency. perhaps with the right funding and resources, good work can be accomplished while 2a and 2b are mitigated? i do think quantum is a problem worth working on, even if there is only a 1% chance that it ever affects bitcoin. i also think alarm bells about urgency have ultimately been positive for pushing these discussions forward. but finally, i am also very encouraged that there are a lot of people who are indeed thinking deeply about the implications, mitigations, and solutions, including many bitcoin developers these are just my impressions and are definitely open to discussion and disagreement

@unkle_skunkle @TheGuySwann @tintinjpeg who are you even talking to here?

@tintinjpeg As an admitted ‘toxic Bitcoin maxi’ let me try to explain. For most of us Bitcoin isn’t an ‘investment.’ It’s an escape. From the whole tradfi fiat system. Which incentivizes and enables the silent extraction of wealth from the many, to the benefit of the few, the powerful and well-connected insiders who’ve managed to sidle up to close proximity with the magic money printer. Bitcoin is the first and best exit that’s ever existed from that rapacious and opaque regime. It’s not a game. It’s not a joke. It’s not just one more way to pump our fiat bags. It is literally a life raft, away from the leaking, sinking fiat Titanic. And most of the passengers on the ship are still dancing on the deck while the band keeps playing. So when alt-coiners come around diverting attention from the lifeboats, we may not see you as malicious. But we do see you as ignorant, and spreading ignorance to people who desperately need to be informed. About the iceberg that’s been hit, the breach in the hull, and the water quietly rushing into the the lower decks. When Bitcoiners are not gentle with you, please understand that it’s not to offend you or disparage your ‘crypto’ project du jour. It’s because, in our view, you are helping to condemn our fellow passengers to the financial equivalent of a watery grave at the bottom of the North Atlantic

I’m nearly universally kind when I meet people, but this is not a good direction, imo. Being ignorant of a scam doesn’t make one innocent or not liable for the consequences. One does not have to be mean, but we should absolutely still have principles and boundaries as to what is ethical behavior.

@tayvano_ @ImperiumPaper it's right there. That is an actual legal document that has been served to the Arbitrum DAO. Active and valid legal restraint.

@ImperiumPaper Where’s the actual TRO bc what they linked is just fancy lawyer paperwork. Not from a judge or a court.

@bc1nuno It's also fake. All enclave get updates. There is no such thing as an immutable TEE. The image hash is going to change. And if it can be updated, the data must have a way to go to the TEE with the new image. But that new TEE can't generate a decryption key until it exists...

This innovation with enclaves is stupid. Imagine you are a bank (which is custodial) and that you print numbers on the user accounts (which is what they do). Now the bank decides to use a secure enclave to encrypt users keys. Does using encryption makes the bank non custodial now? You know the answer…

@hb2759 @sitbyriver9026 @Pledditor freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.

I think we can declare the era of "diminishing returns" in bitcoin as being over. I mean, the returns can't really diminish any lower than they've already diminished.