MysticHODL ∞/21M

#Bitcoin is the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone. It will set off a trophic cascade that will completely change our world. Stack Sats and enjoy the show. How Wolves Change Rivers youtu.be/ysa5OBhXz-Q via @YouTube

@BTCBreadMan We should be at $200 already.

How is STRC ever supposed to sustainably go up in price if Saylor keeps smashing the fuck out of the ATM? We already lived through this with MSTR. Do we really have to suffer through it again with STRC?

@ManniloTrader @newstart_2024 Maybe he meant England? 🤷‍♂️

@newstart_2024 "Spain is geographically farther west than Portugal" 🤡

@Dogetoshi Doge coin?

Lads, and I say this earnestly, I do believe we are on the cusp of the greatest ponzi known to man.

@luke_veil @VentureCoinist @saylor Also, quantum is fake and bitcoin is much more than just software.

@VentureCoinist @saylor Absolutely nothing he is doing is even close to changing the world. You do not change the world via financial engineering.

This clip of @saylor from last year is incredible. Everyone sees the big Bitcoin buys, the ai pictures, the memes, the videos... But this is the only time he ever went deep into what truly motivates him to keep pushing further. "What's dissatisfying is to think that you peaked 10 years earlier. You hit a plateau and you can't go any further. I just thought, is this all there is? I wanted to change the world." Makes it that much better with $BTC back above his entry and the STRC buying machine is coming alive.

@luke_veil @VentureCoinist @saylor Keep telling yourself that.

@hillery_dan Exactamundo.

STRC tapped into a special pool of money somewhere, unlocking an entire new market for Bitcoin.

@MorganCMcK @KHerriage

@KHerriage The quantum cryptography threat is real and would sink Bitcoin without serious reprogramming which could itself disrupt the network by making mining too expensive.

He’s exactly right. Investor sentiment has been in the toilet forever…completely washed out, deep into extreme fear for > 2 months. The problem last October, when BTC was $126k was that you couldn’t find a bear. Today it’s hard to find a bull (because apparently, BTC is tied to pedophiles and/or quantum computing is going to hack it). Best contrarian set-up in a very long while. 🚀

@JohnCarreyrou New York Times liberals are the most out of touch demographic in America, and it’s really not close. It’s actually quite an interesting phenomenon. No matter the domain they just don’t get it.

If you’re not Satoshi and you know The New York Times is going to publish a big story identifying you as Satoshi, do you agree to participate in a photo shoot for that story?

@BitPaine Quantum is the downfall of the nerds. Sorry.

it is certainly possible that quantum computing, an industry that has more invested capital than the entire market cap of Bitcoin, is completely fake and literally just a nic carter-led psyop to steal your bitcoin. that this psyop is so complete that it has buy in IBM, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Intel, multiple startups, MIT, Stanford, UC Berkeley, CalTech, Oxford, Cambridge, ETH Zurich, Waterloo, and Innsbruck but it is also possible - some would argue far moreso - that you are a fucking retard

@matteopelleg Not really the same thing though.

MASTERPIECE

A day in the life of Bitcoin’s 17th year: ✅ $1.4 trillion, 90-year-old firm releases new BTC product ✅ Energy exporter demands payment in BTC ✅ NYT still can’t figure out who Satoshi is ✅ Fortune 500 company rolling out BTC payments for 4M merchants How we doing fam?

@ProfSteveKeen @DSBatten Comes across as intellectual laziness.

@DSBatten No, I have opinions about bitcoin as an ineffective form of money, as an expert on money, and as something which will be an early casualty of realising we need to drastically reduce energy consumption on this planet, as an expert on energy and GDP. So that's what I answer.

An open letter to @ProfSteveKeen regarding your recent comments about Bitcoin and Bitcoin mining. Respectfully, I have listened to your comments on Bitcoin mining and it is very clear that you have no understanding of how Bitcoin mining works. This is not a hill you I believe you should be seeing your reputation die on. Specifically it is very clear that you have no understanding that it is a flexible user of energy that does not rival other energy users for its power, no understanding of the well established ability Bitcoin mining uniquely has to monetize otherwise wasted renewable energy, no understanding of how Bitcoin mining obviates gas peaker plants, and no understanding of the unique role Bitcoin mining is playing in methane mitigation. You also appear not to understand that these facts are not some pot pouri of greenwashing claims from "Bitcoin supporters" looking to defend their assetclass but datapoints that have been repeatedly established in 24 peer reviewed journals, and 8 independent reports (including Cambridge University) Your characterization of Bitcoin supporters as not understanding the interrelationship between global warming and energy dynamics is as patronizing as it is a reconfirmation of your own lack of research, given there are a number of committed environmentalists, climatetech investors and climate scientists who are avid supporters of Bitcoin mining precisely because it already can and is incentivizing renewable energy transition and methane mitigation at scale. You also appear ignorant of the fact that the first generation research on Bitcoin mining that suggested environmental harm was debunked in peer reviewed study in 2023 and that is why the media has not quoted this study since. Finally your contention that Bitcoin is "going to zero" because mining will become unprofitable shows again an appalling lack of basic understanding of the economics of Bitcoin mining. Bitcoin mining companies are able to earn ancillary revenue through any number of means, they may be vertically integrated, they may mine using last-gen machines on stranded solar/wind, they may mine offgrid on otherwise wasted power sources such as landfills of oil&gas fields, they may be nation states such as Bhutan using Bitcoin mining on their otherwise surplus hydro energy. These unique abilities of Bitcoin miners mean that far from being at risk, Bitcoin mining is by far the most resilience industry in the face of rising energy prices. The mere fact that Bitcoin mining exists and is growing in EU despite already very high energy prices is proof of Bitcoin miners' resilience to rising energy costs that affect other industries far more. Your opposition to Bitcoin, and Bitcoin mining, appears more motivated by regret aversion, a well documented psychological phenomenon where someone who "misses out" rationalizes that "there was nothing to miss out on" rather than engage in genuine intellectual curiosity and humility by revisiting their decision, and this is leading you to invest an inordinately large amount of time dismissing a technology you have made an inordinately small amount of time trying to understand. When someone of your standing in the field of economics talks so dismissively about a domain they have spent so little time seeking to understand, it does not weaken that domain, rather it weakened 1. your reputation 2. people's general trust in economists 3. the extend to which we esteem people in society with the title "professor" If you want to continue to erode the reputation of all three, you are welcome to do so. Bitcoin does not care. Bitcoin miners will continue to stabilize grids, monetize wasted renewable energy, mitigate methane, obviate the need for gas peaker plants with or without you. But if you ever decide to re-allocate a small fraction of the hours you have spend dismissing Bitcoin mining into understanding how the technology works that you are dismissing, I would be more than happy to connect you to any number of utilities, renewable energy experts, methane mitigation specialists, climate scientists, climatetech investors or battery engineers who can explain to you why Bitcoin is an essential part of solving the exact issues you claim to care about. Daniel Batten Environmentalist, Climatetech investor, Bitcoin mining analyst

Unpopular opinion: I don’t think the four year cycle is dead, it’s literally playing out exactly how it always has.

@TheBTCTherapist Guy hasn’t been right in five years

I thought this guy's model said Bitcoin was going to $500K, now he's predicting $30,000?

@bergealex4 It is so obviously never happening. I have no idea how people are this retarded.

Upon closer look at actual lab progress, I am confident QC is an elaborate scam. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Two quantum x crypto papers dropped last week and crypto Twitter has been spiraling. I am Jose Mourinho when I dive into crypto conversations. “If I speak, I am in big trouble. In big trouble." And here we go... 🎶 The estimate for how many qubits you'd need to break Bitcoin's cryptography just fell from millions… to 10,000. And 9 minutes to crack it? BTC devs are screaming FUD and conspiracy! That we hate crypto (I love crypto, unpopular opinion in the quantum community, sorry...) This is from a Caltech + @TeamOratomic paper (arxiv.org/abs/2603.28627) using neutral atom qubits and a new error correction architecture. Google Quantum AI published a companion whitepaper (lnkd.in/gVsW7AWg) the same week. Oratomic used Google's circuits and showed you could run them with 50x fewer qubits. I promised you all that I'd let you know when this timeline got real for crypto. It just got really real for me. The qubit requirements for Shor's algorithm have dropped five orders of magnitude in two decades. "Still two orders of magnitude left" doesn't comfort me much here. ~6.9M BTC sitting in exposed addresses. Harvest now, decrypt later attackers already stockpiling encrypted data today. Satoshi's coins are a mess. Three points I'm frustrated by: 1. "But Bitcoin will be the least of our problems if quantum computers can crack encryption!" The internet is already upgrading. Over 50% of human initiated Cloudflare traffic is PQC. iMessage, WhatsApp, Chrome, all transitioning. BTC is screaming they don't care. 2. Someone said “We figured out how to make the algorithm that breaks Bitcoin run more efficiently…on a quantum computer that'll never actually exist.” — Google. Except Google recently acquired Atlantic Quantum, a superconducting qubit company, and is now kicking off a neutral atom quantum computer buildout. 3. "But if this becomes real, the price will crash and it'll be pointless anyway." Maybe that's the point? Does any world government actually want a fully decentralized currency to survive? Who benefits from that outcome? Not us. I was in DC last week, and discussions on re-authorizing the National Quantum Initiative Act are happening. Look, what I learned is, if you want people to listen and agree in DC? Just say "China". Quantum is a national security issue. The BTC community pushback has been intense. I get it. But the answer isn't to argue about the timeline, it's to build systems that can swap cryptographic primitives when the standard changes. NIST has already finalized post-quantum standards. CNSA 2.0 mandates the transition for national security systems.

Path to $10,000 Bitcoin Gaining Traction - "Almost Unimaginable" from the article below and Michael Saylor's quote at the December Economic Club of Miami event (around $90,000) -- "we buy Bitcoin with money we can't afford to lose" -- add to my overdue revision conviction for risk assets. Bitcoin and cryptos the tip of the iceberg, MSTR a leader. There was one in 2009; now among millions of cryptos, Bitcoin may stabilize if the stock market remains resilient. US stock market volatility has never stayed so low alongside surging risk metrics in gold and crude oil. Crude's surge in 2008 fueled the Great Recession -- I see parallels. Other 2026 normal reversion outlooks: $40 WTI crude oil, $4 copper, 4% US T-bond, $4,000 gold, $50 silver. The start of the third 50% drawdown in the S&P 500 since 2000. sherwood.news/crypto/bloombe… Full report on the Bloomberg here: blinks.bloomberg.com/news/stories/t… {BI COMD} #Bitcoin #stockmarket #crudeoil

I spent the evening looking into quantum computing timelines as a non-expert in quantum computing. Here is what I’ve learned: We currently have machines with ~1,000–1,500 physical qubits at error rates around 10⁻³, and Google’s algorithm requires ~500,000 physical qubits operating coherently together with surface code error correction, yoked qubit storage, magic state cultivation producing ~500K T states per second, and reaction-limited execution at 10μs cycle times — none of which has been demonstrated beyond small-scale proof-of-concept experiments. Scaling from where we are to where this needs to be isn’t a matter of incremental improvement along a Moore’s Law curve; it requires solving qualitatively new engineering problems in qubit fabrication yield, correlated error suppression across a massive chip (or multi-chip interconnects that don’t exist yet), cryogenic wiring and control electronics for half a million qubits, real-time classical decoding at the required throughput, and sustained coherence of a “primed” quantum state across minutes of wall-clock time — any one of which could prove to be a multi-year bottleneck, and all of which must be solved simultaneously.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Given the above, I just don’t see how we’re going to get to a cryptographically relevant quantum computer by 2030, especially given that we need a ~350× increase in physical qubit count with simultaneously tighter error correlations, an entirely new cryogenic control and wiring architecture to address half a million qubits, real-time decoding infrastructure that doesn’t exist yet, magic state distillation factories operating at industrial throughput, and multi-minute coherent idle times for primed states — and historically, solving even one of these at scale has taken the field the better part of a decade.

@czenriquez @mc_khristina I know, its hard to keep up with the changing stories. I do think paper is a better option than plastic, but best are the trader joes canvas bags that last for decades.

@plebtocracy @mc_khristina It was before they banned paper. But their complaint was that we were killing trees and using too much water to make the bags. Idk. I’m just reporting the facts in this crazy state. I bring my own. Easier. Plus the paper bags are so thin you have to be careful or they fall apart

So let me get this straight, I go to the grocery store and buy … a pound of sliced turkey in a plastic bag, a loaf of bread in a plastic bag, a gallon of milk in a plastic jug, a pack of napkins in plastic wrap, a store-made salad in a plastic tub, a plastic bottle of mustard and ketchup, but they won't give me a plastic bag to carry it home because the plastic bag is bad for the environment? 🙄😂

@czenriquez @mc_khristina 100% renewable resource, and biodegradable to boot.

@mc_khristina But now we’re back to killing trees with only paper bags allowed 🤷🏼‍♀️. And still everything else is plastic.