anyways

he plead not guilty and trial set for 2nd OCtober 2023
and so the drama will die down until then

bitcoin 2009-2014 was undefined legally so treated as private property (like trading cards or auctioned art) thus regulators had no remit/jurisdiction

as soon as it was defined as currency it allowed regulators to the licence businesses wanting to "swap" currencies to be treated as money service businesses

now they dont want to see crypto as currency, but instead a commodity (elemental/raw product used to create other products) basically mainnet used to lock value for underlying subnetworks of iou/pegged tokens

which is a different set of regulators
now its being deemed as a crypto asset instead of a cryptocurrency (government deciding to change terminology) other regulators can jump in.
as a currency for instance only the SEC could regulate us businesses using crypto..
as a commodity the CFTC can get involved and control trade quota's classify investor types, set circuit breaks on trade volitility.. and it also means the EPA can then mandate miners get a licence to be more ecological/efficient or be banned

but with all that said
there is movement in the BIS(banks of international settlement) are proposing to let central banks hoard crypto assets of upto 2% of banks combined collateral reserves in 2025.
sec and cftc are trying to classify crypto to allow commercial banks access to hoard crypto

so although there are some worse case scenarios that have happened and could happen. there is also some positives that could occur too

to expand on the peer-to-peer exchanging using de-fi and bank transfers

(this is not about illegal scenario by government this is a warning to those in current legal currency setting.. )
even now governments see bitcoin as a legal currency and as such that means banks see transferring crypto as a service for a fee/commission, as a financial service/money business..
if people are abusing their personal bank accounts to do multiple wire transfers to strangers(of any value) a bank can flag that as operating a business or suspicion of money laundering and request answers or just freeze all services(no more wire transfers) where the bank account holder has to withdraw their cash/ask for a bankers cashiers cheque, close their account and seek an account elsewhere..
or
confess/admit they were operating as a service, draw up a business plan, get a business account and get licenced as a money service business to continue operating

yep even when bitcoin is a legal currency be careful doing decentralised exchanging using a unlicensed personal bank account too often

many times you will also find your 'customers' doing transfers with you, will then scam you by saying their account was hacked and money was falsely used to buy coin, and they want their money back. which then puts a flag on your account. where you then have to start doing due diligence to prove you are handling customers correctly by doing KYC on them to get photo Id proof of who was transacting with you.

currently lack of trade/volume on DEX/defi has not shown major instances of the above. but the more populate traders get, the more it will happen

new law for UK 2023

every new house build has to include a car charging port on the external wall of the house

so instead of a hole in the wall to have a gas pipe into the house there is no a hole for a electric cable going out of the house

but yes supermarket car parks is a way forward and see an end to "fuel stations"

trucking industry will have truckstops operating "pitstops" where they have batteries fortlifted off the truck cabin and swapped with a charged battery (like a F! racecar pitstop where they swap tires in fast pace time)

these pitstops will be at most distribution centres and "major truckstops"
thus trucks are not stuck having to wait for charging they just have batteries swapped out while they take a 30minute break or have their haul off/onloaded at a distribution centre

take your tin foil off
governments are politicians that sit in "the capitol" or "parliament" they are not sat in offices typing away at computers watching everyone star bucks purchases

you are confusing politicians with ex bankers now puppet mastering regulatory agencies

its the banks and financial service industry watching transactions and reporting the juicy stuff to regulators

he has done many interviews expressing his views

he says its like digital gold(deflationary asset) but with the extra security of being an asset itself but digital.. rather than a certificate of an asset(like digital gold)
thus better than digital gold

also for years gold has been stuck in the $1k-$2k window of trading
where as bitcoin too has a non-zero bottom(real value($15k currently)) that will slowly raise up over time to new raised bottoms, the tops(premiums(ATH $70k)) can also go up hugely, meaning there is more room for more profit and growth

other things are that bitcoin has its own utility. and also underneath as a bridge to other sub layer iou/pegged tokens that could offer more novel utility. in essence the options of utility could expand into things we are not thinking about today.

current sub networks of iou/pegged tokens are still sandbox testing and yes saylor is motivated by the obvious promoted ones, but he sees alot more opportunities in others yet to come that can expand deeper and deeper down in sub of sub networks thus offering more to the mainnet capital locked for those subnetworks, thus raising the bar for all coins in the mainnet

lets imagine all countries tried it.. here is the result
bitcoin will go brown (not completely dark)

less miners asic farms and more independant hobby miners in basements
(secret mining where authorities cant shut them all down in one swoop)

less legit exchanges for people to openly buy and sell coin.
(more blackmarket decentralised trading for coin)

but to absolutely abolish bitcoin. well.. look how well the international "war on drugs" or the 1920s "alcohol prohibition" went

people got drunk then and get high now.. and authorities cant be in all places at all times to stop it

the more decentralised the network is by having usernodes with full node(archiving) set to distribute the ledger, the more miners scattered in multiple locations, the more services scattered and set to run remotely where there is no physical "office" the less chance authorities have to make bitcoin go brown

the four area's of concern are
(A)mining
(B)development/protocol direction
(C)custodians/service/exchanges
(D)user nodes

my personal concern is more on the BC vs D

miners cannot change the rules independantly, they need cooperation with the econonic nodes(C) or/and (B) where by if (c) is running code handed to them by (B or A) which can change the network without (D) consensus(consent)

so miners have a few leaps to jump to have power to change the network.. all they can do alone is maybe re-org the blocks back a few blocks to make a few spents become unspent again. which unless they have transactions worth a couple $million is not worth undoing
...
however (B) can work with (c) and threaten (AD) much more easily
and in most cases (B) can just slide in any changes they want now without (ACD)
..
many people rely on C as a "bank" and if there are too many (c) brands all under the same umbrella parent company.. if one card falls the whole stack falls. meaning lots of custodians close and lock customers away from their funds

C is a easy fix. just dont hold coins on exchanges for long periods
A is a easy fix. miners just jump pools if a pool if gaining too muchblock solving rate

B we are stuck with the CORE centralisation with its hierarchy and moderation and their hate of being critiqued and reviewed (unless its done by their own clan) although they 'should' be open to independent/outside review/critique as they are a critical component of the network.. and they 'should' be open to having different competing brands of full nodes offering proposals and user adoption

D well user nodes that are not (c) dont have much power or sway either way. its just now being treated as "following" rules rather than consenting/consensus deciding which rules should be followed(i dont like the sheep follow game. but thats what it is)

google:
"The rev*. dat files (the "undo files"), contain all UTXOs spent by the inputs of a block. It was introduced in Bitcoin Core 0.8, and contains a concatenation of records, one for each block. This mimicks the structure of the blk*"

it basically holds a copy of txs that are spent tx....(opposite of a utxo set) incase there was a re-org/rollback the node doesnt have to go around requesting old blocks that got previously spent to be relisted as unspent, to then update the utxo database

its more of a internal time saver in cases of rollback

and yes many advise its helpful to copy the rev files too

(my personal node had full blockchain but i edited it to only have a certain amount of other files like rev files as its not often needed to re-org that far back, but still helpful to have recent rev files to speed up any re-org)

i have not personally messed to much with my version. so best to try to copy as much as possible to save as much time as possible
rev files should be ~60gb total

if you are only copying the first 50% of blk's then just copy the reciprocal first 50% of revs so they can correlate to the blk data

copying over just blk may save time of having to re download the initial block download process. but without the other files like rev, your system then need to read each block again the create the utxoset and rev sets. which is a bit extra of "rescan" time as they call it

the bit about gentoo(linux) and "they got it all" is about that he said he found malware that was script kiddie made but made to target his system(s) specifically

this means its the same people that were hacking him since november exploring his systems and then editing their malware to follow a path they seen so that they can get deeper into his system with each attack and get more access to things
..
manually hacking and exploring takes time which means more time for victim to spot an attack. but if you make a bot do most the work and you add on new paths per attack to automate the process so that you can get deeper each time before getting spotted then you have better chance of getting valuable data sooner with less attacks needed to explore the system

i simply mean
instead of you driving to the mountains. to then drag the dead dozer back to your location, to then repair it into a working vehicle to then sell as working vehicle to another guy in the mountains...
or
instead of you driving to the mountains. to then drag the dead metal back to your location, to then sell as scrap locally

have you thought about. researching the dead dozer holders location in the mountains for other companies IN THAT location. to just get for free the bulldozer and just drive it to his neighbour to sell it to them as a dozer for them to use for spare parts

EG if the dead dozer only needs 20% of parts to make it work. it means its already got 80% working parts already. so you can sell it for like 40% of full value as just a cache of spare parts for the mountain mans neighbours and all it has cost you is some fuel between neighbouring companies in the mountains

EG
your plan
you--------->mountain┐
| repair<---------------┘ sell for hopeful 60% working second hand
|   └----------->buyer┐  but cost you more fuel parts and time to repair
└----------------------┘                          

instead of
you--------->mountain┐
 |                               |  sell for hopeful 40% as mostly good parts.
 └-----------buyer<----┘  zero repair time and less fuel

if you are born rich and then mis-manage money. it can bring anxiety

if you are born poor and then manage money. it can bring security

i was more of the second scenario. and i am more relaxed, i have no anxieties anymore.

most of my 'wealth' is in crypto and i have enough to no longer even care about the whims of the daily price movements. im secure, bills get paid and i get to travel without having to check my balance.

if you reach a point where you have more funds than expenses, where you no longer need to count pennies or look for ways to accumulate more for necessity/survival. then you have security

again
commercial banks are different category to central banks. commercial banks can do as they please.. its their business, the report to SEC/fca/finra and are family of banks becasue regulators are ex bankers most of the time  .. so can easily make rules fit.. so commercial banks can and do invest already

central banks are a different category they have higher restrictions/standards
its actually the central banks that WANT TO INVEST. its why they are negotiating with the BIS
the BIS initially said 'ok 1% limit" .. the central banks responded with "no, 5% please" and BIS responded "ok compromise 2%"

so it looks like the banks want to invest upto 2% of bank collateral/reserves in crypto. but the BIS are the ones limiting them

much like the IMF wanted to limit el salvador

windfury have you seen lukes religious beliefs recently.. one way or another luke is compromised. but the threshold is.. what?
im not saying he should be removed just for religious beliefs i was making a plain comment that someone else was hinting IN A TONGUE IN CHEEK manner that gavin got removed for "keys compromised" and dubious funding/commentary..

and now in this post. i am now saying.. so whats the threshold for removal from core team?? again not saying remove him. just a comment about whats the threshold(and its rhetorical not actually requiring an answer)

if you cant get satire/rhetorical comments. then please stop pressing the reply button to go streaming into 20 rants about how you adore things and think everything else is gaslighting you

(i feel your about to take a sly-small satirical comment made by someone else, and then me highlighting the cheekiness of said comment.. to go into a massive defend a dev debate that lasts weeks.. so lets just pre-empt all your lil digs and resolve it all in one post.)

edit above comments to address windfurys responses below(ending debate before he goes left field)

firstly i didnt say he was compromised. to the same extent as gavin..
YOU were having a dig at Digaran when HE suggested in satire to remove luke
I said digaran was making a tongue-in-cheek comment(aka satire).
(i guess you didnt get the hint)
YOU then(post below) acted as if i was saying what digaran said.. without you understanding what i or digaran was saying. in short you took things too far to cause more social drama

edit above comments to address windfurys responses below(ending debate before he goes left field)

---

anyways (only edited below the underlines to my points about compromise)
as for decisions of doing things to defend BITCOIN against compromised devs..
requires seeing if a devs PGP keys are compromised and ensuring that no one aimlessly downloads software containing a compromised keys signature post compromise of said keys..

however then
adoring a dev just because "they are core", ignoring their flaws as humans, treating them as gods just having a bad day.. is not good for the decentralised security of bitcoin. defending a dev above the security of bitcoin is also not a good trait to have

trying to be part of a kiss ass team wanting to break bitcoin rules to ensure bitcoin only follows a business sponsored roadmap is not good for bitcoin

and when a dev that was sponsored to implement a "feature" but is found later on not even using the feature they were highly involved in implementing.. says alot about the whole situation

you admiring luke due to a implementation involvement. yet then seeing luke himself doesnt use that feature in the last 5 years of opportunity to use it.. should make you probably want to call luke out for gas lighting you into a implementation you thought he truly wanted.. but later found out he doesnt use.. right?.. correct?
or are you still just going to kiss ass a dev as if devs never make mistakes.. as if he is a god having a bad day just because of some social drama team of dev idols you are in.

just because a dev wrote some code for bitcoin does not mean it requires blind idolism of them as gods. we actually should be critical and review devs regularly to keep them on their toes to ensure they dont keep putting trojans into the code.. not idolise them and pretend they can put anything they like in and dont need review and no one should criticise them

luke spent some coin in september 2022 with the change going back to his wallet. which had other spends 2019-2022 thus his keys were exposed to a node that had internet access

he did not use hardware(offline signing) wallets

i think that comment was a tongue in cheek hint about the fact that gavin was removed from core when he was compromised(targetted and bribed by altcoin scammer CSW)

caution when confusing the words cold vs offline

back in the good old days we had no concept of "offline"(hardware wallets) we had paper wallets and backups as 'offline'

our usage of the words cold or hot were for home use(private internet access pc) vs server use(public access)

offline vs online were about
paper/wallet.dat backups/airgapped
vs
node imported/used wallets/keys

---

if keys were truly generated in an (airgapped) offline method where the keys were never exposed to a Pc that uses the internet.. then the only risk is some greedy relative being nosey in your house(or a burglar)

foundry is a DCG company

antpool is a bitmain company

so calm down just a little. the tin foil is not needed

..
the whole story is.
people(customers) that want to purchase bitmain hardware(asics) but dont want to run them from home can(option not pre-requisite) finance the purchase and then get the hardware sent.. via foundry.
whereby for a management fee foundry will run the asics for customers that want to use/buy bitmain hardware

DCG(foundry) obviously make profits on management fee's from coin rewards.. and also on the spread between bitmains retail prices customers see vs the wholesale cost DCG(foundry) actually pay for the hardware

bitmain is a hardware manufacturing busines with a side service as a pool for international customers that want to use their pool(option not pre-requisite)

DCG(foundry) are a financing company of many companies. and yes DCG has alot of fingers in alot of pies
(kraken, riple, circle, genesis, coinbase, heck even FTX was a sister company of DCG but shhh they dont want that mentioned much)

https://dcg.co/portfolio/

bitmain is not owned by DCG. they just done a deal together to purchase alot of asics and where DCG profit from being the middleman of purchasing at wholesale/bulk. and charging customers at retail and management fee some of that end-sold hardware to customers

i dont like the guy, but im fence sitting this one, as much as possible trying not to lean over and pick a side to fall into

he wasnt asking for help from the FBI via twitter. he was ranting that the FBI was not helpful.. it was a rant not a plea for help. he did say he contacted the authorities via the normal route and got nowhere. (got stuck in the pass the bucket of call centre hell)
to me it felt more like he was just speaking aloud thoughts in his brain "grrr fbi where are you when i need you" rant

..
but as for the 'i got hacked, and coins were mixed'
that part is seeming less inline..

first he said coins were cold. whereby its actually shown coins were hot and used in september, thus wallet was exposed to internet

secondly funds of the addresses raided in new year were legacy which he said were origin funded before seeds and multisig existed..

thirdly they dont seem to be mixed because the 1yar address is not mixing them, its hoarding them
..

im trying to keep an open mind. but to me its looking more like he moved coins to a new address he owns(1yar) and is claiming "i been hacked" for a tax dodge

ok so surprise to me. looking into it. i thought it was some old.. OLD stash of coins from an old.. OLD addresses (as it was said they were legacy and "seeds did not exist then")
and he was one of the biggest proponents of segwit.. yet in 2019-2022 was still using legacy.. (much like sipa stil does for donations)
(im not gonna go into the irony/hypocrisy of many debates about the whole ideational some devs had for segwit but not end up using it themselves.. ops just did)

---

however the coins that were lost were majority coins from a wallet that was shuffling and spending coins from 2019-september 2022..

so here is a short version of spends
there was a tx of 191btc UTXO in september 2022 to spend 20btc to give back change of 171btc
https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/471c3bd4fc9cbaaa4dddd7f21acb070702723b2d03759066835c367d26667fd5

where the 171btc change, along with some other coins from other addresses then got raided at new years to send funds to a coinjoin(1YAR address)
https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/432ded946431a9612f09d73bd15ded045d11d1095ffdfe8d68306ea9b2e78930

(im not calling it a coinjoin, luke said the 1YAR address was a coinjoin)

so its now known he did expose keys to the internet in september 2022

..
as for the supposed 'coinjoin mixer' scenario luke hints.. strange thing is his raided coins went into the 1YAR address.. but have not moved out.

which does not sound like a mixer to me, usually mixers move coins out within 24-48 hours(max) of going in.. the dont stash/hoard coins for long