mohrt

Michael Saylor: CEO of Kool-Aid & King of the Corporate Cult Prophet of Thermodynamic Delusion, Martyr of the Shareholder Ledger, High Priest of the Hopium Eucharist Michael Saylor didn’t just buy Bitcoin. He made it his god, his brand, and his exit strategy—all in one hit. One day, he’s the sleepwalking CEO of a dying analytics firm. The next, he’s Moses on Adderall, descending from Mount CoinDesk with two stone tablets engraved with HODL memes and a $4 billion leverage position. He didn’t “get into” Bitcoin. He inhaled it through both nostrils, rubbed it on his gums, mainlined it into his portfolio, and started speaking in tongues about monetary entropy and solar flares. If CNBC had any decency, they’d list MicroStrategy’s ticker under cults, not tech. This is a man who mortgaged his company, diluted his shareholders, and sold junk bonds to buy an asset he barely understood but described like a stoned freshman in a physics lecture. “Bitcoin is energy… truth… time… fire… the solution to thermodynamic decay.” Somewhere in that word salad is a quarterly loss the size of a small nation’s GDP. But don’t worry—he’ll tell you it’s just “volatility within the upward spiral of monetary transcendence.” No one’s allowed to say it, so I will: Michael Saylor sounds like a TimeCube forum moderator who discovered PowerPoint. He turned a public company into a leveraged Bitcoin ETF without regulatory approval and called it strategy. No risk management, no hedging, just pure uncut conviction wrapped in a technocratic death spiral. He didn’t DCA. He YOLO’d with shareholder equity and the confidence of a man who thinks gravity is optional if you believe hard enough. When the price went up, he was a genius. When it crashed? Still a genius—just temporarily misunderstood by the universe. It’s not a loss, it’s a “long-term adoption curve.” Right. And my pub tab is an investment in the future of hops. Let’s talk about his sermons. Watching a Saylor keynote is like entering a doomsday prepper’s TED Talk. He mixes metaphysics with markets, quotes Genghis Khan and Thermo Fisher in the same breath, and finishes with a dead stare like he just heard God whisper “sats” in his ear. You’ll hear things like “Bitcoin is a swarm of cyber hornets” and “digital property in cyberspace carved into blocks of thermodynamic integrity.” Translation: he’s lost the plot and we’re all supposed to clap. It’s the kind of presentation that makes you wish overhead projectors still caught fire. And the followers—oh, the followers. They call him visionary. Visionary? He’s a Maximalist Elmer Gantry with a calculator and a martyr complex. He thinks every company should convert its cash reserves into Bitcoin and hold through hell. Tell that to CFOs who like not being sued. The man would sell his spine to buy another sat if he thought it might make a headline. And every time Bitcoin drops, he doubles down like a bloke who walked into a casino, bet the house, lost, and claimed it was all part of his macro thesis. His real genius is simple: he saw a cult and crowned himself messiah. He didn’t build Bitcoin. He bought it—on margin, at the top, with a grin. He took shareholder capital, loaded it into a cannon, and fired it at the moon while shouting "laser eyes!" Then he called it legacy. Bitcoin didn’t need Saylor. But he needed it—needed something to wrap around the rotting husk of MicroStrategy and make it look like destiny, not desperation. And people bought it. At least for a while. He didn’t lead a revolution. He converted a balance sheet into a suicide note and read it aloud at every conference. #SaylorTheSacrificial #ThermodynamicTrainwreck #HopiumMessiah #KoolAidCFO #BTCClownVerse #MicroStragedy

Yes indeed csw also won tulip case And among the USA government and almost every other country and government courts Csw dr. Craig wright is proven to be the sole creator of Bitcoin and authored the Bitcoin white paper The only Courts or jurisdiction where dr. Craig wright is “not Satoshi” is uk copa v wright And if you see that case in live or see the videos of the court case everyday Dr. Craig wright proved every document and showed us how it works and told us everything to be verified He also offered to show us how bitcoin works and told prove he created Satoshi But clearly the judges and the lawyers knew he is the creator of bitcoin but needed to buy time And that’s why end results were to stay silence for a period of time The case copa v wright is very interesting because you can tell the truth from Body languages and the verifications to every questions asked. Dr. Craig wright man handles the entire court room and was braking down every peace of frauds from the copa side also interesting is that copa and the judge in this case did not even look at not even one document provided by dr craig wright The entire case went off of copa documents which were fraud And csw documents were not even produced in court Therefore how does copa sue csw and when csw brings his evidence they refused to review it lol This tells you clearly what happened and what’s going on Hence the entire world now knows Csw created bitcoin and Bitcoin is bsv

@Vivek4real_ Because whales who bought a long time ago are selling. Today's buyers are tomorrow's bag holders. That's how pyramid schemes work.

@Vorstand1 @ScotchHorse @theswansjr Satoshi said as the chain scales the mining nodes will end in large mining farms. SPV section of the white paper. Read it. You don’t need to run your own node. Satoshi also said in the same paragraph if you don’t get it, I don’t have time to convince you. That applies to you.

@ScotchHorse @theswansjr Yes, sure. We will all trust a few large datacenters. Nobody needs to verify the blockchain anymore.

People tell me BSV is the real Bitcoin. If that's true, why is the "real Bitcoin" the one nobody uses, nobody builds on, and whose founder lost in court trying to prove he invented it?

@dotkrueger HE'S TALKING ABOUT BTC, NOT BITCOIN STEALING SATOSHI'S COINS? CONSTANTLY CHANGING THE PROTOCOL? FORKING ALL THE TIME? QUANTUM BULLSHIT? YES, BTC HAS LOST THE PLOT THE ORGINAL PROTOCOL LIVES ON AS BSV DEAL WITH IT

@saylordocs He never logged into bitcointalk.org. The forum was migrated there after he left. His account is compromised, he won't try to log in there.

16 years ago, Satoshi Nakamoto logged off the Bitcoin forum and hasn’t returned What happens if he logs back on?

You don’t need the whole blockchain to verify payments. With Simplified Payment Verification, a wallet verifies inclusion via Merkle proofs and basic headers, staying truly peer‑to‑peer.

@coinbureau Hurry, prepare for the phantom QC. 🫡singulargrit.substack.com/p/quantum-illu…

⚠️ALERT: FT reports that the crypto industry is now bracing for quantum computing threat. Here's the brutal truth nobody in CT wants to hear: Only ~15 crypto projects on Earth are seriously building for quantum. If your favorite coin isn't one of them, you're holding a wallet with a death clock. The list 👇 PROTOCOL-NATIVE QUANTUM RESISTANT (mainnet, today): 🔷 QRL (XMSS, mainnet since 2018) 🔶 Abelian (lattice-based, mainnet 2022) 🔷 Cellframe (Dilithium + Picnic) 🔶 Mochimo (WOTS+, audited by Dr. Hülsing) 🔷 xx Network (David Chaum, PQ BFT consensus) 🔶 Nexus (FALCON + Signature Chains) PQC LIVE IN PRODUCTION (partial): 🔷 Algorand — Falcon state proofs since 2022, first Falcon mainnet tx Nov 2025 (consensus still Ed25519) 🔶 Hedera — SEALSQ QS7001 chip, shipped Nov 2025 ACTIVELY IMPLEMENTING (testnet): 🔷 QANplatform — Dilithium, EVM-compatible testnet 🔶 Tron — QuantumShield hybrid signatures on testnet 🔷 Circle's Arc — USDC-native L1, opt-in Dilithium + Falcon at mainnet (2026) ROADMAP ONLY (still vulnerable today): 🔷 Bitcoin — BIP-360 + BIP-361 (7-year migration) 🔶 Ethereum — $2M PQ team, pq.ethereum .org, 2029 target 🔷 Cardano — IO Research "Vision 2026: Post Quantum Secure" proposal 🔶 Solana — Falcon roadmap (April 2026), Winternitz Vault live 2+ yrs 🔷 Ripple/XRP — 4-phase roadmap, ML-DSA on AlphaNet, 2028 target Not listed = not building = your funds, eventually someone else's. Harvest now, decrypt later.

This is big. Give the crypto cesspit the tools they need to pull themselves out with bsv.

There is no provable transaction on-chain between Alice and Bob. Alice can spend the coin before Bob moves it. Someone can intercept the private key and swipe the coins. So although you try to pretend exchanging private keys is some sort of transaction, its not. Its just adding an intermediary to the spending account.

@mohrt @CsTominaga No I stand by that. Moving bitcoin from one person to another sometimes happens offchain via things like paper wallets, then someone with a paper wallet eventually moves the funds onchain, removing them from the paper wallet/private key. Where is the error?

The paper-wallet argument is a wonderful little museum exhibit of confusion. A paper wallet is a private key printed on paper. It may serve as a crude storage mechanism if the owner generates it securely, keeps it private, protects it from theft, fire, cameras, printers, malware, and human idiocy, and then later sweeps it properly. That is storage. It is not trustless exchange. If I hand you a paper wallet and say, “Here, this is payment,” you have not received final settlement. You have received a secret that I may already know, may have copied, may have photographed, may have printed twice, may have backed up, may have given to someone else, or may sweep before you do. How charming. A payment instrument whose security depends on believing that the person paying you has not retained the ability to steal it back. That is not Bitcoin. That is trust wearing stationery. Bitcoin solved the trusted third-party problem by allowing transfer through public settlement, not by handing people secrets and asking them to admire the envelope. So when someone claims paper wallets are a reliable form of exchange, rather than merely a primitive custody method, there are two possible explanations. They are stupid. Or they are dishonest. And since “or” is inclusive, not exclusive, the more ambitious may achieve both. One must admire the efficiency. It takes genuine talent to misunderstand private-key custody, payment finality, double-spend risk, and trust assumptions in a single sentence. A paper wallet handed from one person to another is not a Bitcoin transaction. It is a confidence trick with a QR code.

@ClioBitcoinBank @CsTominaga You mentioned earlier paper wallets are "off-chain transactions", then purported "off-chain transactions settle on-chain", so either you are trying to be disingenuous or just like to troll. I'm not finding much use in carrying on this conversation.

@mohrt @CsTominaga >Of course exchange of private keys can happen, I don't think anyone disagrees with that. I hate to be the one to break it to you but, I've never claimed paper wallets are secure, just that they exist as the simplest way bitcoin changes hands offchain.

Of course exchange of private keys can happen, I don't think anyone disagrees with that. There is just very little use case around it. A dollar bill has no way of getting re-spent by person A, so bad analogy. A seed phrase backup is for storing the keys to an HD wallet, not exchanging. A paper wallet is a backup of private keys. Paper wallets can work for say, gifting coins to family members, only because the TRUST is accepted. Outside of that, signed transactions are the model that works in any practical sense. For instance, you can't go to a crypto exchange and trade private keys as a method of transacting.

@mohrt @CsTominaga Nobody said they were some wonderful security model to be idolized, exactly the opposite in fact. I know it hurts you to admit for some reason, but bitcoin does change hands this way, often. I've never signed a dollar bill, a seed phrase backup, or paper wallet. Thats purposeful.

@ClioBitcoinBank @CsTominaga I agree that paper wallets exist. But they don’t work for peer-to-peer payments without trust. They also carry no signatures, important for evidence of a transaction in the case it is needed.

@mohrt @CsTominaga Try it this way mohrt, is j-walking an example of someone crossing the street? (see how I'm not asking if j-walking is a good idea here? just if it exists?)

@ClioBitcoinBank @CsTominaga Trading private keys requires trust. Read the white paper, maybe you’ll figure it out.

@mohrt @CsTominaga Sure but nobody is advocating for paper wallets as a replacement for onchain txs. If onchain fees become too high or there is some other problem, one can skip the chain using offchain txs they must secure themselves.

If party A writes a check and hands to party b, they should deposit immediately while funds still clear. If party a hands party b a signed transaction, party b should send to the network quickly before utxos are spent. What you are advocating is handing party b your online banking login for your account. This is a silly argument. Handing private keys around does not work for transactions. Paper wallets are just private key storage, not transactions. Handing keys around requires trust between parties, and is subject to security issues, and has no tx attached.

@mohrt @CsTominaga Yes I did, and it didn't hold up. Party A can deny party B the payment by never giving them the keys at all, they dont need to risk the person quickly sweeping, they just don't send the keys in the first place. Reread the 2 rebuttals and try again.

@ClioBitcoinBank @CsTominaga You didn’t read anything I said

@mohrt @CsTominaga If party a wants to deny party b the payment, they just wouldn't pay in the first place. This is essentially how a check works as well. The bearer of the check gets paid when they cash in the check, same as the keys.

@ClioBitcoinBank @CsTominaga Also handing keys around is susceptible to being intercepted in transit. Another security issue. A sign transaction can’t be tampered.

If you are just handing keys, party a could spend coins before party b does. Also party b has access to all the coins in the address. A much better approach is party a hand party b a signed transaction. It is party b’s best interest to send the tx to the network quickly before the UTXOs are spent. No private keys exposed, no unnecessary trust.

@ClioBitcoinBank @CsTominaga When you hand someone private keys, that just means both of you can move the coins, but only the first mover. That is not an off chain transaction as you say. That is two people trusting each other to do the right thing.

@CsTominaga When did I ever say "you know who they are" wtf does that even mean and why do you pretend I said it? WHo is this third person you are talking to right now?

@FrancoisBasson @TFTC21 Crime

@TFTC21 Let's be honest ,what's the downsides? Performance?ease of use? I would actually love to use something like this but I dont want to give up performance or speed, what is the bottlenecks in a setup like this

Martti Malmi, one of Bitcoin's earliest developers, just released a new version of Nostr VPN, an open-source mesh VPN that replaces the entire trust model of traditional VPN services. Traditional VPNs route all your traffic through a central server operated by a company you have to trust. They see your data. They require your email. They can log your activity. They can be subpoenaed, hacked, or shut down. Even modern mesh VPNs like Tailscale, which improved on this by sending data peer-to-peer, still require you to authenticate through a centralized coordination server using third-party accounts like Google or Microsoft. Nostr VPN eliminates the central server entirely. Your identity is a Nostr keypair, a self-generated cryptographic key pair with no registration, no email, no third-party account. The underlying transport layer is FIPS (Free Internetworking Peering System), a self-organizing encrypted mesh network where nodes authenticate each other, route traffic for each other, and establish connections without any central authority or global topology knowledge. Each node's Nostr public key (npub) serves as its network address. The architecture uses two layers of encryption: hop-by-hop encryption between peers and independent end-to-end encryption between mesh endpoints with periodic rekeying for forward secrecy. When direct connections fail due to NAT issues, the system falls back to Nostr-based multihop routing through other FIPS nodes rather than relying on company-operated relay servers. Peer discovery and NAT traversal happen through public Nostr relays using encrypted gift-wrapped messages. The new release adds native desktop apps for macOS, Linux, and Windows, an Android app, Nostr-based multihop routing for when NAT holepunching fails, and improved network management. It supports UDP, TCP, Ethernet, Tor, and Bluetooth transports simultaneously on a single mesh. This is what happens when you apply Bitcoin's design philosophy, permissionless, self-sovereign, no trusted third parties, to networking infrastructure. Built by one of the people who helped Satoshi build Bitcoin in 2009.