tags: Bitcoin Magazine Bitcoin Price Surges Back to $116,000 After Bloody Crypto Weekend It’s been a rocky three days for the crypto market… to say the least. But bitcoin holders are faring best, as bitcoin price bounced back sharply to around $116,000 today following a volatile weekend that saw the broader crypto market slump. The bitcoin price fell to the low $100,000s on Friday as U.S. and China trade tensions rattled global markets. President Donald Trump announced new 100% tariffs on Chinese goods after Beijing unveiled sweeping export controls set to begin Nov. 1. But over the weekend, market jitters eased and the bitcoin price gradually rebounded. President Trump walked back some of the fear and posted that ‘it will all be fine’ in reaction to the trade tensions. The recovery comes as both institutional inflows and corporate treasury activity help stabilize sentiment across crypto markets. The latest leg higher was sparked, in part, by Strategy’s announcement that it had purchased an additional 220 BTC for roughly $27.2 million, bringing its total holdings to 640,250 BTC — about 3.1% of Bitcoin’s total supply. The company funded the purchase through proceeds from several at-the-market (ATM) share offerings over the past week. JUST IN: $116,000 #Bitcoin pic.twitter.com/CExFQL01Zw — Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) October 13, 2025 While Strategy’s accumulation has long been a fixture of bull market narratives, analysts say the timing of this latest buy sent a strong signal of confidence to jittery investors following Friday’s sell-off. Bitcoin price panic to recovery Technical analysts now view a bitcoin price of $105,000 as key short-term support, while $118,000 remains the level to reclaim for bulls to reassert control. The broader bias remains cautious, with oscillators still tilting bearish following the steep drawdown. Beyond short-term price action, the recovery highlights Bitcoin’s growing foothold among corporate treasuries and institutions. Recent data show continued inflows into U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, with BlackRock’s IBIT ETF surpassing 800,000 BTC in assets under management — valued near $97 billion. That steady institutional accumulation, coupled with corporate entities like Strategy, DDC Enterprise, and others adopting Bitcoin as a treasury reserve, has become a defining feature of this market cycle. With the next Bitcoin halving approaching in April 2026 and macro conditions still volatile, analysts expect more turbulence ahead. But the underlying narrative remains supportive: limited supply, rising institutional demand, and growing legitimacy as a treasury asset. At time-of-writing, bitcoin is trading around $116,050, up roughly 9% from its weekend lows. This post Bitcoin Price Surges Back to $116,000 After Bloody Crypto Weekend first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

content:
[Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com)
![](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Bitcoin-Price-Surges-Back-to-116000-After-Bloody-Crypto-Weekend-.jpg)
[Bitcoin Price Surges Back to $116,000 After Bloody Crypto Weekend](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-surges-back-to-116000)

It’s been a rocky three days for the crypto market… to say the least.

But bitcoin holders are faring best, as bitcoin price bounced back sharply to around $116,000 today following a volatile weekend that saw the broader crypto market slump.

The bitcoin price [fell](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/bitcoin-price-crashes-to-108000-as-trump-to-impose-100-tariffs-on-china) to the low $100,000s on Friday as U.S. and China [trade tensions](https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/wall-street-takes-back-fridays-losses-trump-softens-tone-china-trade-t-rcna237277) rattled global markets. President Donald Trump announced new 100% tariffs on Chinese goods after Beijing unveiled sweeping export controls set to begin Nov. 1.

But over the weekend, market jitters eased and the bitcoin price gradually rebounded. President Trump walked back some of the fear and [posted](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/10/12/trump-china-trade-tariff-tensions/86661372007/) that ‘it will all be fine’ in reaction to the trade tensions.

The recovery comes as both institutional inflows and corporate treasury activity help stabilize sentiment across crypto markets.

The latest leg higher was sparked, in part, by Strategy’s [announcement](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-rebounds-above-114000-as-strategy-buys-220-more-bitcoin) that it had purchased an additional 220 BTC for roughly $27.2 million, bringing its total holdings to 640,250 BTC — about 3.1% of Bitcoin’s total supply.

The company funded the purchase through proceeds from several at-the-market (ATM) share offerings over the past week.

> JUST IN: $116,000 [#Bitcoin](https://twitter.com/hashtag/Bitcoin?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) ![🚀](https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/16.0.1/72x72/1f680.png) [pic.twitter.com/CExFQL01Zw](https://t.co/CExFQL01Zw)
>
> — Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) [October 13, 2025](https://twitter.com/BitcoinMagazine/status/1977825928811343997?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

While Strategy’s accumulation has long been a fixture of bull market narratives, analysts say the timing of this latest buy sent a strong signal of confidence to jittery investors following Friday’s sell-off.

Bitcoin price panic to recovery
-------------------------------

Technical analysts [now view](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-weekly-close-at-115k-after-fridays-crash-support-at-105k-holds-but-bears-dominate) a bitcoin price of $105,000 as key short-term support, while $118,000 remains the level to reclaim for bulls to reassert control. The broader bias remains cautious, with oscillators still tilting bearish following the steep drawdown.

Beyond short-term price action, the recovery highlights Bitcoin’s growing foothold among corporate treasuries and institutions. Recent data show continued inflows into U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, with BlackRock’s IBIT ETF [surpassing](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-reclaims-122000-as-blackrock-bitcoin-etf-surpasses-800000-btc-aum) 800,000 BTC in assets under management — valued near $97 billion.

That [steady institutional accumulation](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/institutions-plan-to-double-bitcoin-and-crypto-exposure-by-2028-state-street-research-finds), coupled with corporate entities like Strategy, DDC Enterprise, and others adopting Bitcoin as a treasury reserve, has become a defining feature of this market cycle.

With the next Bitcoin halving approaching in April 2026 and macro conditions still volatile, analysts expect more turbulence ahead. But the underlying narrative remains supportive: limited supply, rising institutional demand, and growing legitimacy as a treasury asset.

At time-of-writing, bitcoin is trading around $116,050, up roughly 9% from its weekend lows.

This post [Bitcoin Price Surges Back to $116,000 After Bloody Crypto Weekend](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-surges-back-to-116000)  first appeared on [Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com) and is written by [Micah Zimmerman](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/authors/micahzimmerman).


tags: Bitcoin Magazine Citi to Launch Crypto Custody Service in 2026 as Wall Street Deepens Bitcoin Push Citi is reportedly preparing to roll out a crypto custody service by 2026, joining a growing list of Wall Street institutions expanding into bitcoin and other assets due to a friendlier U.S. regulatory climate. Biswarup Chatterjee, Citi’s global head of partnerships and innovation for its services division, told CNBC the bank has been developing its custody offering for over two years and plans to bring it to market “in the next few quarters.” The service would allow Citi to hold native bitcoin and other crypto on behalf of clients, a significant move for one of the world’s largest custodians of traditional financial assets. “We may have certain solutions that are completely designed and built in-house that are targeted towards certain assets and certain segment of our clients, whereas may we may use a third party, lightweight, nimble solution for other kind of assets,” Chatterjee told CNBC. Earlier this month, Citigroup analysts issued a bullish 12-month outlook for bitcoin, setting a target of $181,000 and revising their year-end forecast to $132,000. They cited strong inflows of around $7.5 billion and rising institutional demand. The analysts said they were more positive on bitcoin than ethereum, noting that bitcoin was capturing most of the new capital entering crypto markets and that a supportive U.S. regulatory backdrop could help sustain momentum into 2026. JUST IN: Wall Street giant Citi bank to launch #Bitcoin and crypto custody services in 2026 — CNBC pic.twitter.com/awPWDITXkx — Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) October 13, 2025 Banking and holding custody of digital assets Custody — the safekeeping of client assets — is considered one of the most crucial and challenging aspects of institutional crypto adoption. Just today, JPMorgan said they would not directly hold their clients’ crypto. While specialist firms like Anchorage and BitGo have dominated the space, large banks see an opening to offer regulated alternatives backed by decades of experience safeguarding securities. Citi’s crypto embrace comes as Washington has taken steps to provide clearer rules for digital assets through measures such as the GENIUS Act, giving major financial institutions confidence to develop crypto-related products. Citi’s exploration of custody runs parallel to its broader blockchain efforts, including Citi Token Services, which enables real-time cross-border payments using tokenized deposits. The bank is also studying stablecoins — digital tokens typically backed by fiat currency — as tools for global trade and payments in regions with less-developed banking systems. Other banks are advancing similar initiatives As mentioned earlier, JPMorgan recently unveiled plans for a deposit token, while Bank of America is reportedly developing a stablecoin product. This post Citi to Launch Crypto Custody Service in 2026 as Wall Street Deepens Bitcoin Push first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

content:
[Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com)
![](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Citi-to-Launch-Crypto-Custody-Service-in-2026.jpg)
[Citi to Launch Crypto Custody Service in 2026 as Wall Street Deepens Bitcoin Push](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/citi-to-launch-crypto-custody-service-in-2026-as-wall-street-deepens-bitcoin-push)

Citi is reportedly preparing to roll out a crypto custody service by 2026, joining a growing list of Wall Street institutions expanding into bitcoin and other assets due to a friendlier U.S. regulatory climate.

Biswarup Chatterjee, Citi’s global head of partnerships and innovation for its services division, [told CNBC](https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/13/citi-aims-to-launch-crypto-custody-in-2026-exploring-stablecoin.html) the bank has been developing its custody offering for over two years and plans to bring it to market “in the next few quarters.”

The service would allow Citi to hold native bitcoin and other crypto on behalf of clients, a significant move for one of the world’s largest custodians of traditional financial assets.

“We may have certain solutions that are completely designed and built in-house that are targeted towards certain assets and certain segment of our clients, whereas may we may use a third party, lightweight, nimble solution for other kind of assets,” Chatterjee told CNBC.

Earlier this month, Citigroup analysts [issued](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-flirts-with-120000-as-citi-gives-strong-bitcoin-price-target) a bullish 12-month outlook for bitcoin, setting a target of $181,000 and revising their year-end forecast to $132,000. They cited strong inflows of around $7.5 billion and rising institutional demand.

The analysts said they were more positive on bitcoin than ethereum, noting that bitcoin was capturing most of the new capital entering crypto markets and that a supportive U.S. regulatory backdrop could help sustain momentum into 2026.

> JUST IN: Wall Street giant Citi bank to launch [#Bitcoin](https://twitter.com/hashtag/Bitcoin?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) and crypto custody services in 2026 — CNBC ![🙌](https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/16.0.1/72x72/1f64c.png) [pic.twitter.com/awPWDITXkx](https://t.co/awPWDITXkx)
>
> — Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) [October 13, 2025](https://twitter.com/BitcoinMagazine/status/1977805211185127479?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

Banking and holding custody of digital assets
---------------------------------------------

Custody — the safekeeping of client assets — is considered one of the most crucial and challenging aspects of institutional crypto adoption. Just today, JPMorgan [said](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/jpmorgan-confirms-clients-will-trade-bitcoin-and-crypto) they would not directly hold their clients’ crypto.

While specialist firms like Anchorage and BitGo have dominated the space, large banks see an opening to offer regulated alternatives backed by decades of experience safeguarding securities.

Citi’s crypto embrace comes as Washington [has taken steps to provide clearer rules](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/trump-signs-genius-act-into-law-will-make-america-the-crypto-capital-of-the-world) for digital assets through measures such as the GENIUS Act, giving major financial institutions confidence to develop crypto-related products.

Citi’s exploration of custody runs parallel to its broader blockchain efforts, including _Citi Token Services_, which enables real-time cross-border payments using tokenized deposits.

 The bank is also studying stablecoins — digital tokens typically backed by fiat currency — as tools for global trade and payments in regions with less-developed banking systems.

Other banks are advancing similar initiatives As mentioned earlier, JPMorgan [recently unveiled](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/jpmorgan-confirms-clients-will-trade-bitcoin-and-crypto) plans for a deposit token, while Bank of America is reportedly developing a stablecoin product.

This post [Citi to Launch Crypto Custody Service in 2026 as Wall Street Deepens Bitcoin Push](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/citi-to-launch-crypto-custody-service-in-2026-as-wall-street-deepens-bitcoin-push)  first appeared on [Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com) and is written by [Micah Zimmerman](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/authors/micahzimmerman).


tags: Bitcoin Magazine Bitcoin Weekly Close at $115K After Friday’s Crash: Support at $105K Holds, But Bears Dominate Bitcoin Price Weekly Outlook I feel like a broken record saying this, but it bears repeating: Wow, what a difference a week makes! Bitcoin pulled back a little as expected early last week, but then the bears came in with a sucker punch on Friday morning as Trump’s talk of raising tariffs on China sent markets crashing down. Things escalated quickly after liquidity dried up in the afternoon to send bitcoin down to a low of $105,617 on the index price. The price action was a bit chaotic as some leveraged exchanges went as low as $102,000 and even $100,000. After the carnage was done, bitcoin had a nice bounce back up to close the week out at $115,128. The bears are still firmly in control, however, as long as the price remains below $118,350. Key Support and Resistance Levels Now The price dove deep down through all the more recent support levels last Friday, but the $105,000 support level managed to prove itself, propping up the price for the time being. Bulls will now look for this low to hold, but if it is lost, we would look down once again to the $96,000 level for support. Closing below there should certainly put an end to this bull market for the foreseeable future. We can draw a Fibonacci Retracement from the $126,219 high down to the $105,617 low, opening up a wide range of price action. The bulls can start to retake resistance levels above the 0.618 Fibonacci Retracement at $118,350, with new highs expected if bulls can close a couple of days above the 0.786 Fibonacci Retracement at $121,800. Outlook For This Week A big bounce after such a steep sell-off was to be expected, and we got that into the weekly close. So it’s hard to know what to expect going into this week. Oscillators on the daily chart are still biased bearish, but not overly so, so bulls still have a chance to save face here. Over the next few days, bulls will want to avoid closing any days below the 0.236 Fibonacci Retracement at $110,500 as that opens up the $105,000 low once again. On the flip side, bears will look to keep the price below the 0.618 Fibonacci Retracement resistance at $118,350. Getting above here flips bias back to the bulls over the short term, but they have an uphill battle to do it. We have a neutral zone between $112,000 and $118,350, with $115,630 being the divider for bullish and bearish bias within this zone. So we may see bitcoin remain stuck in this zone over the next few days. Market mood: Bearish – After an epic dump on Friday, the bulls have been left stunned. Even the bears didn’t know they could hit that hard. While price made big gains to close the week out well above the low, the bulls still have more work to do to regain control of this price action. The next few weeks Interestingly, the low price last Friday hit the lower trend line of the broadening wedge pattern on the daily chart. It is still possible that price heads all the way back up to the upper trend line of this pattern once again. However, we must still be cognizant of the fact that this broadening wedge pattern could break down as well, forming a long-term top in the market. The bulls do not want to see any daily closes below that lower trend line, as it would signal a breakdown that would likely drop into the low $80,000 range as a minimum. Getting back to the upper trend line of the broadening wedge (around $127,000) would have bulls looking for the bullish breakout of this pattern once again. The bulls will be walking on eggshells over the coming weeks. They don’t want to see any price action close to $105,000 again, and will be hard-pressed to push the price back above $122,000. Terminology Guide: Bulls/Bullish: Buyers or investors expecting the price to go higher. Bears/Bearish: Sellers or investors expecting the price to go lower. Support or support level: A level at which the price should hold for the asset, at least initially. The more touches on support, the weaker it gets and the more likely it is to fail to hold the price. Resistance or resistance level: Opposite of support. The level that is likely to reject the price, at least initially. The more touches at resistance, the weaker it gets and the more likely it is to fail to hold back the price. Fibonacci Retracements and Extensions: Ratios based on what is known as the golden ratio, a universal ratio pertaining to growth and decay cycles in nature. The golden ratio is based on the constants Phi (1.618) and phi (0.618). Broadening Wedge: A chart pattern consisting of an upper trend line acting as resistance and a lower trend line acting as support. These trend lines must diverge away from each other in order to validate the pattern. This pattern is a result of expanding price volatility, typically resulting in higher highs and lower lows. Oscillators: Technical indicators that vary over time, but typically remain within a band between set levels. Thus, they oscillate between a low level (typically representing oversold conditions) and a high level (typically representing overbought conditions). E.G., Relative Strength Index (RSI) and Moving Average Convergence-Divergence (MACD). This post Bitcoin Weekly Close at $115K After Friday’s Crash: Support at $105K Holds, But Bears Dominate first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Ethan Greene - Feral Analysis.

content:
[Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com)
![](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/tn-2.webp)
[Bitcoin Weekly Close at $115K After Friday’s Crash: Support at $105K Holds, But Bears Dominate](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-weekly-close-at-115k-after-fridays-crash-support-at-105k-holds-but-bears-dominate)

**Bitcoin Price Weekly Outlook**
--------------------------------

I feel like a broken record saying this, but it bears repeating: Wow, what a difference a week makes! Bitcoin pulled back a little as expected early last week, but then the bears came in with a sucker punch on Friday morning as Trump’s talk of raising tariffs on China sent markets crashing down.

Things escalated quickly after liquidity dried up in the afternoon to send bitcoin down to a low of $105,617 on the index price. The price action was a bit chaotic as some leveraged exchanges went as low as $102,000 and even $100,000. After the carnage was done, bitcoin had a nice bounce back up to close the week out at $115,128. The bears are still firmly in control, however, as long as the price remains below $118,350.![](blob:https://bitcoinmagazine.com/cdee600e-7b42-4a36-8195-7af1c8ac0566 "Bitcoin Weekly Close at $115K After Friday's Crash: Support at $105K Holds, But Bears Dominate 1")

**Key Support and Resistance Levels Now**

The price dove deep down through all the more recent support levels last Friday, but the $105,000 support level managed to prove itself, propping up the price for the time being. Bulls will now look for this low to hold, but if it is lost, we would look down once again to the $96,000 level for support. Closing below there should certainly put an end to this bull market for the foreseeable future.

We can draw a Fibonacci Retracement from the $126,219 high down to the $105,617 low, opening up a wide range of price action. The bulls can start to retake resistance levels above the 0.618 Fibonacci Retracement at $118,350, with new highs expected if bulls can close a couple of days above the 0.786 Fibonacci Retracement at $121,800. ![](blob:https://bitcoinmagazine.com/fb4fc4ba-59dc-4308-94b2-8f6c8857dab2 "Bitcoin Weekly Close at $115K After Friday's Crash: Support at $105K Holds, But Bears Dominate 2")

**Outlook For This Week**

A big bounce after such a steep sell-off was to be expected, and we got that into the weekly close. So it’s hard to know what to expect going into this week. Oscillators on the daily chart are still biased bearish, but not overly so, so bulls still have a chance to save face here. Over the next few days, bulls will want to avoid closing any days below the 0.236 Fibonacci Retracement at $110,500 as that opens up the $105,000 low once again.

On the flip side, bears will look to keep the price below the 0.618 Fibonacci Retracement resistance at $118,350. Getting above here flips bias back to the bulls over the short term, but they have an uphill battle to do it. We have a neutral zone between $112,000 and $118,350, with $115,630 being the divider for bullish and bearish bias within this zone. So we may see bitcoin remain stuck in this zone over the next few days.

**Market mood:** Bearish – After an epic dump on Friday, the bulls have been left stunned. Even the bears didn’t know they could hit that hard. While price made big gains to close the week out well above the low, the bulls still have more work to do to regain control of this price action.![](blob:https://bitcoinmagazine.com/b91eefa9-e8af-4c9a-a24c-e994834fdc6a "Bitcoin Weekly Close at $115K After Friday's Crash: Support at $105K Holds, But Bears Dominate 3")

**The next few weeks
**Interestingly, the low price last Friday hit the lower trend line of the broadening wedge pattern on the daily chart. It is still possible that price heads all the way back up to the upper trend line of this pattern once again. However, we must still be cognizant of the fact that this broadening wedge pattern could break down as well, forming a long-term top in the market.

The bulls do not want to see any daily closes below that lower trend line, as it would signal a breakdown that would likely drop into the low $80,000 range as a minimum. Getting back to the upper trend line of the broadening wedge (around $127,000) would have bulls looking for the bullish breakout of this pattern once again.

The bulls will be walking on eggshells over the coming weeks. They don’t want to see any price action close to $105,000 again, and will be hard-pressed to push the price back above $122,000.

**Terminology Guide:**

**Bulls/Bullish:** Buyers or investors expecting the price to go higher.

**Bears/Bearish:** Sellers or investors expecting the price to go lower.

**Support or support level:** A level at which the price should hold for the asset, at least initially. The more touches on support, the weaker it gets and the more likely it is to fail to hold the price.

**Resistance or resistance level:** Opposite of support.  The level that is likely to reject the price, at least initially. The more touches at resistance, the weaker it gets and the more likely it is to fail to hold back the price.

**Fibonacci Retracements and Extensions:** Ratios based on what is known as the golden ratio, a universal ratio pertaining to growth and decay cycles in nature. The golden ratio is based on the constants Phi (1.618) and phi (0.618).

**Broadening Wedge:** A chart pattern consisting of an upper trend line acting as resistance and a lower trend line acting as support. These trend lines must diverge away from each other in order to validate the pattern. This pattern is a result of expanding price volatility, typically resulting in higher highs and lower lows.

**Oscillators:** Technical indicators that vary over time, but typically remain within a band between set levels. Thus, they oscillate between a low level (typically representing oversold conditions) and a high level (typically representing overbought conditions). E.G., Relative Strength Index (RSI) and Moving Average Convergence-Divergence (MACD).

This post [Bitcoin Weekly Close at $115K After Friday’s Crash: Support at $105K Holds, But Bears Dominate](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-weekly-close-at-115k-after-fridays-crash-support-at-105k-holds-but-bears-dominate) first appeared on [Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com) and is written by [Ethan Greene - Feral Analysis](#molongui-disabled-link).


> !['The Lightning Network' Does Not Exist](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/03/lightningnetwork.webp)
>
> The former seems to have found solid product market fit. Expect significant volume, adoption, and usage going forward.
>
> The latter's future remains to be seen. Dependence on Tor, which has had massive reliability issues, and lack of strong privacy guarantees put it at risk.
>
> — ODELL (@ODELL) [October 27, 2022](https://twitter.com/ODELL/status/1585633149815377922?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref=discreetlog.com)

**The Basics**

*   Lightning is a protocol that enables cheap and fast native bitcoin transactions.
*   At the core of the protocol is the ability for bitcoin users to create a payment channel with another user.
*   These payment channels enable users to make many bitcoin transactions between each other with only two on-chain bitcoin transactions: the channel open transaction and the channel close transaction.
*   Essentially lightning is a protocol for interoperable batched bitcoin transactions.
*   It is expected that on chain [bitcoin transaction fees will increase](https://www.discreetlog.com/utxos/) with adoption and the ability to easily batch transactions will save users significant money.
*   As these lightning transactions are processed, liquidity flows from one side of a channel to the other side, on chain transactions are signed by both parties but not broadcasted to update this balance.
*   Lightning is designed to be trust minimized, either party in a payment channel can close the channel at any time and their bitcoin will be settled on chain without trusting the other party.

**There is no 'Lightning Network'**

*   Many people refer to the aggregate of all lightning channels as 'The Lightning Network' but this is a false premise.
*   There are many lightning channels between many different users and funds can flow across interconnected channels as long as there is a route through peers.
*   If a lightning transaction requires multiple hops it will flow through multiple interconnected channels, adjusting the balance of all channels along the route, and paying lightning transaction fees that are set by each node on the route.

**Example:** You have a channel with Bob. Bob has a channel with Charlie. You can pay Charlie through your channel with Bob and Bob's channel with User C.

*   As a result, it is not guaranteed that every lightning user can pay every other lightning user, they must have a route of interconnected channels between sender and receiver.

**Lightning in Practice**

*   Lightning has already found product market fit and usage as an interconnected payment protocol between large professional custodians.
*   They are able to easily manage channels and liquidity between each other without trust using this interoperable protocol.
*   Lightning payments between large custodians are fast and easy. End users do not have to run their own node or manage their channels and liquidity. These payments rarely fail due to professional management of custodial nodes.
*   The tradeoff is one inherent to custodians and other trusted third parties. Custodial wallets can steal funds and compromise user privacy.

**Sovereign Lightning**

*   Trusted third parties are [security holes](https://nakamotoinstitute.org/trusted-third-parties/?ref=discreetlog.com).
*   Users must run their own node and manage their own channels in order to use lightning without trusting a third party. This remains the single largest friction point for sovereign lightning usage: the mental burden of actively running a lightning node and associated liquidity management.
*   Bitcoin development prioritizes node accessibility so cost to self host your own node is low but if a node is run at home or office, Tor or a VPN is recommended to mask your IP address: otherwise it is visible to the entire network and represents a privacy risk.
*   This privacy risk is heightened due to the potential for certain governments to go after sovereign lightning users and compel them to shutdown their nodes. If their IP Address is exposed they are easier to target.
*   Fortunately the tools to run and manage nodes continue to get easier but it is important to understand that this will always be a friction point when compared to custodial services.

**The Potential Fracture of Lightning**

*   Any lightning user can choose which users are allowed to open channels with them.
*   One potential is that professional custodians only peer with other professional custodians.
*   We already see nodes like those run by CashApp only have channels open with other regulated counterparties. This could be due to performance goals, liability reduction, or regulatory pressure.

[!['The Lightning Network' Does Not Exist](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/03/cashapp-2.webp)](https://mempool.space/lightning/node/02e1221434a21b8ce5818e92c6ec76301824dc87ed94b4628242e4b1f4a6ff445f?ref=discreetlog.com)

*   Fortunately some of their peers are connected to non-regulated parties so payments to and from sovereign lightning users are still successfully processed by CashApp but this may not always be the case going forward.

**Summary**

*   Many people refer to the aggregate of all lightning channels as 'The Lightning Network' but this is a false premise. There is no singular 'Lightning Network' but rather many payment channels between distinct peers, some connected with each other and some not.
*   Lightning as an interoperable payment protocol between professional custodians seems to have found solid product market fit. Expect significant volume, adoption, and usage going forward.
*   Lightning as a robust sovereign payment protocol has yet to be battle tested. Heavy reliance on Tor, which has had massive reliability issues, the friction of active liquidity management, significant on chain fee burden for small amounts, interactivity constraints on mobile, and lack of strong privacy guarantees put it at risk.

* * *

_If you have never used lightning before, use_ [_this guide_](https://werunbtc.com/phoenix?ref=discreetlog.com) _to get started on your phone._

* * *

**_If you found this post helpful support my work with_** [**_bitcoin_**](https://geyser.fund/project/citadel?ref=discreetlog.com)**_._**

!['The Lightning Network' Does Not Exist](https://werunbtc.com/donate.png)


![KYC Bitcoin: Individuals are on Lists](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/02/binancekycleak.webp)

**_What is KYC/AML?_**

*   The acronym stands for Know Your Customer / Anti Money Laundering.
*   In practice it stands for the surveillance measures companies are often compelled to take against their customers by financial regulators.
*   Methods differ but often include: Passport Scans, Driver License Uploads, Social Security Numbers, Home Address, Phone Number, Face Scans.
*   Bitcoin companies will also store all withdrawal and deposit addresses which can then be used to track bitcoin transactions on the bitcoin block chain.
*   This data is then stored and shared. Regulations often require companies to hold this information for a set number of years but in practice users should assume this data will be held indefinitely. Data is often stored insecurely, which results in frequent [hacks and leaks](https://www.newsweek.com/binance-hack-telegram-kyc-data-extortion-changpeng-zhao-cryptocurrency-bitcoin-1452989?ref=discreetlog.com).
*   KYC/AML data collection puts all honest users at risk of theft, extortion, and persecution while being ineffective at stopping crime. Criminals often use [counterfeit, bought, or stolen](https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/10/19/for-200-you-can-trade-crypto-with-a-fake-id/?ref=discreetlog.com) credentials to get around the requirements. Criminals can buy "verified" accounts for as [little as $200](https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/10/19/for-200-you-can-trade-crypto-with-a-fake-id/?ref=discreetlog.com). Furthermore, billions of people are excluded from financial services as a result of KYC/AML requirements.

During the early days of bitcoin most services did not require this sensitive user data, but as adoption increased so did the surveillance measures. At this point, **most large bitcoin companies are collecting and storing massive lists of bitcoiners, our sensitive personal information, and our transaction history.**

**Lists of Bitcoiners**

KYC/AML policies are a direct attack on bitcoiners. Lists of bitcoiners and our transaction history will inevitably be used against us.

Once you are on a list with your bitcoin transaction history that record will always exist. Generally speaking, tracking bitcoin is based on probability analysis of ownership change. Surveillance firms use various heuristics to determine if you are sending bitcoin to yourself or if ownership is actually changing hands.  You can obtain better privacy going forward by using collaborative transactions such as coinjoin to break this probability analysis.

Fortunately, you can buy bitcoin without providing intimate personal information. Tools such as [peach](https://peachbitcoin.com/?ref=discreetlog.com), [hodlhodl](https://hodlhodl.com/?ref=discreetlog.com), [robosats](https://learn.robosats.com/?ref=discreetlog.com), [azteco](https://azte.co/?ref=discreetlog.com) and [bisq](https://bisq.network/?ref=discreetlog.com) help; mining is also a solid option: anyone can plug a miner into power and internet and earn bitcoin by mining privately.

You can also earn bitcoin by providing goods and/or services that can be purchased with bitcoin. Long term, circular economies will mitigate this threat: most people will not buy bitcoin - they will earn bitcoin - most people will not sell bitcoin - they will spend bitcoin.

**There is no such thing as KYC or No KYC bitcoin, there are bitcoiners on lists and those that are not on lists.**

* * *

_**If you found this post helpful support my work with [bitcoin](https://geyser.fund/project/citadel?ref=discreetlog.com).**_

![KYC Bitcoin: Individuals are on Lists](https://werunbtc.com/donate.png)


![Patriot Act 2.0](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/03/restrictact.webp)

The newly proposed RESTRICT ACT - is being advertised as a TikTok Ban, but is much broader than that, carries a $1M Fine and up to 20 years in prison! It is unconstitutional and would create massive legal restrictions on the open source movement and free speech throughout the internet.

The [Bill](https://www.warner.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3/f/3f2eaae6-09ad-49e1-b254-46289cf20cca/843D73B1823EA0D4122B4365262410D6.restrict-act-final-text.pdf?ref=discreetlog.com) was proposed by: Senator Warner, Senator Thune, Senator Baldwin, Senator Fischer, Senator Manchin, Senator Moran, Senator Bennet, Senator Sullivan, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Collins, Senator Heinrich, and Senator Romney. It has broad support across Senators of both parties.

Corrupt politicians will not protect us. They are part of the problem. We must build, support, and learn how to use censorship resistant tools in order to defend our natural rights.

> The RESTRICT Act, introduced by Senators Warner and Thune, aims to block or disrupt transactions and financial holdings involving foreign adversaries that pose risks to national security. Although the primary targets of this legislation are companies like Tik-Tok, the language of the bill could potentially be used to block or disrupt cryptocurrency transactions and, in extreme cases, block Americans’ access to open source tools or protocols like Bitcoin.

> The Act creates a redundant regime paralleling OFAC without clear justification, it significantly limits the ability for injured parties to challenge actions raising due process concerns, and unlike OFAC it lacks any carve-out for protected speech. [COINCENTER ON THE RESTRICT ACT](https://www.coincenter.org/the-restrict-act-creates-blanket-authority-with-few-checks-to-ban-just-about-anything-linked-to-a-foreign-adversary/?ref=discreetlog.com)

[**Full Text of Bill**](https://www.warner.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3/f/3f2eaae6-09ad-49e1-b254-46289cf20cca/843D73B1823EA0D4122B4365262410D6.restrict-act-final-text.pdf?ref=discreetlog.com)

* * *

_**If you found this post helpful support my work with [bitcoin](https://geyser.fund/project/citadel?ref=discreetlog.com).**_

![Patriot Act 2.0](https://werunbtc.com/donate.png)


> ![Money Without Trust](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/03/rdogs.webp)
>
> Bank run on every crypto bank then bank run on every "real" bank.
>
> — ODELL (@ODELL) [December 14, 2022](https://twitter.com/ODELL/status/1602838429447999491?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref=discreetlog.com)

The four main banks of bitcoin and “crypto” are Signature, Prime Trust, Silvergate, and Silicon Valley Bank. Prime Trust does not custody funds themselves but rather maintains deposit accounts at BMO Harris Bank, Cross River, Lexicon Bank, MVB Bank, and Signature Bank. Silvergate and Silicon Valley Bank have already stopped withdrawals. **More banks will go down before the chaos stops. None of them have sufficient reserves to meet withdrawals.**

Bitcoin gives us all the ability to opt out of a system that has massive layers of counterparty risk built in, years of cheap money and broken incentives have layered risk on top of risk throughout the entire global economy. If you thought the FTX bank run was painful to watch, I have bad news for you: every major bank in the world is fractional reserve. **Bitcoin held in self custody is unique in its lack of counterparty risk, as global market chaos unwinds this will become much more obvious.**

The rules of bitcoin are extremely hard to change by design. Anyone can access the network directly without a trusted third party by using their own node. Owning more bitcoin does not give you more control over the network with all participants on equal footing.

> _Bitcoin is:
> \- money that is not controlled by a company or government
> \- money that can be spent or saved without permission
> \- money that is provably scarce and should increase in purchasing power with adoption_

**Bitcoin is money without trust.** Whether you are a nation state, corporation, or an individual, you can use bitcoin to spend or save without permission. Social media will accelerate the already deteriorating trust in our institutions and as this trust continues to crumble the value of trust minimized money will become obvious. **As adoption increases so should the purchasing power of bitcoin.**

> _A quick note on "stablecoins," such as USDC - it is important to remember that they rely on trusted custodians. They have the same risk as funds held directly in bank accounts with additional counterparty risk on top. The trusted custodians can be pressured by gov, exit scam, or caught up in fraud. Funds can and will be frozen at will. **This is a distinctly different trust model than bitcoin, which is a native bearer token that does not rely on any centralized entity or custodian.**_

Most bitcoin exchanges have exposure to these failing banks. Expect more chaos and confusion as this all unwinds. Withdraw any bitcoin to your own wallet ASAP.

Simple Self Custody Guide: [https://werunbtc.com/muun](https://t.co/J61rFmeovE?ref=discreetlog.com)
More Secure Cold Storage Guide: [https://werunbtc.com/coldcard](https://t.co/LMTDzJ86Ec?ref=discreetlog.com)

* * *

_**If you found this post helpful support my work with [bitcoin](https://geyser.fund/project/citadel?ref=discreetlog.com).**_

![Money Without Trust](https://werunbtc.com/donate.png)


Спутниковая угроза для приватности: Ваши данные в открытом доступе?

Исследование выявило уязвимость ГЕО-спутников, передающих конфиденциальную информацию, включая ключи шифрования и SMS, в незашифрованном виде. Для перехвата данных требуется оборудование стоимостью около 600 долларов.

Это представляет серьезную угрозу для пользователей криптовалют, поскольку может скомпрометировать доступ к кошелькам и конфиденциальную информацию о сделках.

Рекомендации: использовать VPN, приложения со сквозным шифрованием (Signal, Telegram), требовать шифрования на всех уровнях.

https://cryptovka.ru/ru/news/4569/sputnikovaya-ugroza-dlya-kripto-privatnosti-vashi-dannye-v-otkrytom-dostupe


/vEAgCcWul4yfv129UwLsXncYSntLrEyZJX19BkZv/+4h6MwNu8PZM6W0pCsQCsd?iv=s1wgZRB4fJCgec2yY8XEJw==


KQJehdllRp1wHM9OFkoII5nV5VMrAfCTLU4KxGasmE949cCfAktvUMSrN5UV58oW1W1f/4kC0n9t8lEfTrsXdw==?iv=dxjwpPPc+7NGabvMrYhnwQ==


content: e

content: d72972012eefffa9ff2a41c29521fae05a0ec2b8bf39630cad07013a855ffb38

content: e

content: bc50558e05d096910948430cee9d12d1577dab8d2c48faff5cf107015f4b57b3

content: e

content: 43b61a356bb3f3a6c5d99cd611c86c6cf504942ac36fa6c0d4ed1ee93935acf8

content: e

content: f3df07229d79589b0fd1f40be647c0af8f4e2bfc0c632bde94e3aec01ef6e1be

content: e

content: d7606c6422a7b65eb0b56b10ef1f5994267393042b06388680155b80ce4bba83

content: e

content: fcb1adff8771ec9b0d9ac9446304740d2b77827dd616f5c65d5e1167729659b6

content: e

content: 7e88304f56cf8f962d5acf1d53ffae3f07ccd750bbd14fdb0221dc3a832b7891

content: e

content: 33943f71b68b98ab4f0353c79e54f0ae59478a5595e8892d52965480b4afdff3

content: e

content: 7ea1e7fe6517cdac626fc3a412b3e8f943eab753052744b80326e0d9ee37d132

content: e

content: dc3514a4acab6c1f629f6a19f30dc3bedc87d2a031a7f0c276e1815556f28616

content: e

content: 2f9c2b989f2b5077abcc622f21436f045c39787d098b67b3c43d8d2b53cee479

content: e

content: f41eb3a6c01250525fe9ccefd925a18efce684f67ec9ba0b64c9f664a7567a79

content: e

content: b139c6239d696382e379decf2978331dc82dd59295b1deeebb9e44c58f445783

content: e

content: 06456c6329d9ebbe0d7e5d6fee4e80082d485a7225fe15e9cc5c99249ddaad36

content: e

content: 56f3743a9ff7a4a67f4189fb5bb8aa65aaa45f0ae82b8203fd57d05d5dbc7685

content: e

content: ffa8c4dfdc5d144c0070ebe7d35226adc85cd15268fef213948e741ba8a8c1f3

content: e

content: d3ef8c6efa19cbe428726cfcb342691f3c10c5117f5f728fa970f4f98cfd07a3

content: e

content: 5050fba1c07ed5849964a9154181ff994a70bbf8592e2021f27b85bc10010476

content: e

content: b6708bd09b457465167a5f03d70a7f992baa7086e4e409036ceb5781706372fd

content: e

content: db339eb0d20f7c6d9f4e92cc0dc2ce5a0691af8b7ea439f5c14725b6a14de204

content: e

content: 436ad3ea57d3ea20548e998d8650ed4757958dbe3215811504503d14475c9420

content: e

content: c7c620d9878bf2f2b339018bf852de68c7ee6702005d9420402cbc38d84b33fc

content: e

content: 800149096bb942133eb2247156de85fb5529f7b4e8931df08cc55748e268945d

content: e

content: 9d4bf1ce9a8fb8cd5b4f40fdbf43aeb675ab693960482521e39534dcbac206f6

content: e

content: bdfdceda5b5dde12efbde674b020dce73b722c85a2b8319c577f7fe31020b677

content: e

content: 8c665c0f659caba6cd464cb840c82efa78861958d0b2cb33b9e4a1e693f39902

content: e

content: fe1824da2f48296b24e6f10d542b95683a9ef57ba65f0bd3ef72ed848f26577a

content: e

content: aa57ab450f5e52f8d7751307b6aba0bcbf39d01be92253a5de952f3c72a95fe1

content: e

content: e1a146645d478016bbf68bc66831de97d7960638f94dfacb34f7fc2fb8a0ee54

content: e

content: 5c33a00e52c86188a69f1159ea50633846800c5dc1441fd9a582cfd0ae13dd91

content: e

content: 3b785551a5840b7d48a132bea63723947d4902ab12f326fe6fbd189d7b9a8394

content: e

content: bdf404af7997663751f3805de201ab7daeb4f50f025c786cb36e36877f566e2a

content: e

content: e84822dd88df0ee4f7cc2a4d4cf1b1e621332e0184915c161ae29cf9b262e19d

content: e

content: a50ebdb2a3c19dfc4d4ddc9a93f93e345aea5cf01600a6a80f9f1285b8889599

content: e

content: 7be05ccbf73885549a6ab2077e8c41daefaaf4357426fa9e8c38f6907a58d87a

content: e

content: 8fa962b91dcdf5f82dc8ab3855f071a38d429c3a3f69e340a9b613d9c0625b17

content: e

content: 06c4de2175c92ea48a5463c8b2531c60a63107376dcbd5840c9a007605480b29

content: e

content: a4f08b6b5c21f85d75025fc8b4ff6c21465720c9f02e59743107965f311571d4

content: e

content: 0cd5fc09e63309fba2e91a6550d5e0a27597aa653176f04a08e717abbdff599d

content: e

content: 5982ca744b32eb8f86167140949d70afd380d5de6c0d69a426f9b6e2367445b5

content: e

content: adafecf7239af23579f5a32b852c964c587cd6e63f0fdfd324a56044b020faf0

content: e

content: 2639e0c0c745449a9e5e2bafdf23e596f434e5d77f2df633ed9314c74572bcaf

content: e

content: 2198a286188c994ab5f659b41e94e79b2a3cef548d826642ad5243b26fffa4ac

content: e

content: bbb9210461e203f448225d1ff3b4565a588a21a0774506cc6c193cd4c8a4b261

content: e

content: 2f0cf63267e3342583e7784ba51419cb7c896dc67cb6c0bc18d1e9d9bdf6c323

content: e

content: 01a0bd82639c3856accbb8d5ba28a2871a95bb0b8fdf9a9b62d6b31c70bba8bf

content: e

content: c362c174c027c51ed2576060583f589e90a42b11a3a8e30391805c53d768136e

content: e

content: cb263057e91cfe37297590500b800737372b755362afeb4b39e22056d7043ded

content: e

content: ec59356f804690dc4be09c73c41c73227402be98dbcf775faa7bfb16eacb26be


59sbCY5iv0RrXC/uopMKk8khdH5cK2eIT2OMxSd0rTYa5zWVgGdaqCLGz520LEO3dY9xh3cekhoHwDxbn8OTjJ2IMm/fnHPj1BZhsf/8Sgw33wtw2F9yLc6uZDQ/81FRPbVs58O46iSB1gxC1iuZWJlOEvfXpjwC31D5p6Aw4U28P7ogE3HEfQfurIbfzWTZZ2U68QR1GlxHpNjFs4gm906MVxX1SkJL1wk78Beg6H9eoVurlLYswfN19jzsEsQ+Ky6SFvmmP+CrT7obJ9rh3A==?iv=RVMacWlds8w8KVoc3qQp4Q==


content: e

content: be1f6a81f3c2e6c30a9a0dca094d10f71a3c08e708ccd37fa59bde1dc41e85f9

content: e

content: 8716af1f8d0f75b96f8028312fc77085014dfb2d1170fdd297bade107fbd471e

content: e

content: 791a2d1f8d109f2dac10990c66da9ba68f52a81e256c3d4c5def8cb699de4fcf

content: e

content: 8b462a82aa4428e455daf6ed57fe9e24bbf5658a7d45802d68e063bf7fbaf6ca

content: e

content: 3d02565b74d1dd0bd4a5195f9e344d243608eda14432dee7fb1f98c11fcae840

content: e

content: 2ca87b278a53d15e9a8417b70b1e6825b83298e1222f4489f62aebc3f4b20ca5

content: e

content: 6fe355baf80cf607c2fd080e0df7fd3f24747d1d4a8cd17d55074646acfbdbbc

content: e

content: a349de1a8d42de9276af52139f662e79e8b2eccbb233e661f617bf8024a0231a

content: e

content: a22e5c5574993fe61ecb0ef402c01748aa86516224c28ec1238dfd8cea481cce

content: e

content: 125d497a8ebc0eb69be6b4d6c00884f48070e06f957331395080353d1c95a8be

content: e

content: c9cd0fb4ff98f30bd923ee2399e6bab983968871accf8a21450563d51408abc2

content: e

content: 2534fca27b7a58d534293b5026c96552c07a551a8ec2ae39e0b69346df1fa688

content: e

content: d7606c6422a7b65eb0b56b10ef1f5994267393042b06388680155b80ce4bba83

content: e

content: c64d78b0f1020094374b677ad6f0895d724fdc57f1dd180d8595bd49d6a18f6c

content: e

content: 64bd4a2aeee742fd3a194966ee44f829574055c8ccd00e210e85b7326ab92b77

content: e

content: d98b7f2d1a21041c204d9d1fca8e779f9d99b292d5a3d7b28559f5addaf74034

content: e

content: 4c5f361c4805bbc627e603b94bbcd52d66e9f9494d021ae456552ebcd85cc1d0

content: e

content: 01fdb930f39af37e2ca91e5f7b38e184e9c56e46feb6a8aeae936113cbd44fbf

content: e

content: 38720f8660872e7d833857901dd7eb926acdab160d55afb1ba0fe758fd4b12d1

content: e

content: 1e11f7c4799ecb927f2a019f04ad57a0fcfb100b66a063fcbce17ffe91ce00f4

content: e

content: 6740830977b686404b3933cec5b16e7d141255c1616da0605946cf8543cc446e

content: e

content: 3abd8271150ed7c262b0471454a6e435bbd230b1f2b8bc682a14d04d9e691ce9

content: e

content: 8148fd314702dab6d847253c13688bbea1e5d5dfc71f5078a14a1bbee1d69cfc

content: e

content: d0f7298fbace280e43e7b3a80d1acac248d6dfa3a7397470c7a11d99fc3b7ea7

content: e

content: dae8df587a9bd1802ee35fbc2eac338fdd340a679806bcbafa311f1a602fa191

content: e

content: bf960b1ecd088137d6f6e34c2fe9ca7d8bb6bacd4e8d2c1769fef4e5a1c2e508

content: e

content: 56f3743a9ff7a4a67f4189fb5bb8aa65aaa45f0ae82b8203fd57d05d5dbc7685

content: e

content: 696ca79295f38fdf68bbccc957e18cb97f9202ab8c5046f174c8e894bfa9791a

content: e

content: 0173fdf08d0eec2c0bb0b6a90a8b5e4640ace8deab24603a6cc51f4a488af6a0

content: e

content: db097f9eec5eb6ed52e3949cadaa64323b627e6e0472f5f74fcb5315cbf16be5

content: e

content: 05c1ae8b8e58545d51b34ddb9fa263a9ae2b216feab995e65b69795042ad53f3

content: e

content: 22df6c9bf14b011f2a533a82e9650ceb9afce5a890f0209db8430e02f69e577e

content: e

content: c83a2c95b62c66114912a189f35bd94e4a6967ad9d8f7a7d43b462486ab3f633

content: e

content: 4d6d54f5625333db74ee376f0cebbdd352379f6e93c5f04ed364f6a0bb56bf7a

content: e

content: 08d26008ada7e2f68c2992671dcf0f4d6a7923ae4d6d51b657e6a9961d800f9c

content: e

content: 1dfb2e86b6318afb8fc0315f49f176c3de5f601586ef68a27d8c81a0b77080d8

content: e

content: 4d84cf168134e5d2efac6737f2f3d72d78e2470ad80a89cc91147c2fc12d943c

content: e

content: 96b655019137aea5f0caabf8ebad8184841a3770236a924b3cbbc0d7c1b76ec2

content: e

content: 7b706c7559bb28b18544ecfc2c9fc398a839a7d15115a726de2eb1532448ad14

content: e

content: 225eddf8c2d78d0e8236a502f22b6af38f91101f3a46a41c73a1e93c83559807

content: e

content: f955a663f5bf8c685713d32ef0cfd6eed7af8fea12447af7dbf70d223d29c66b

content: e

content: 6b70e9a36f763dd4631beacc54b508dd3adf1e81e18ecc87e5fdeab6f5e91d7a

content: e

content: 1e97df9925256820bfa47031f2c6e3b89c35b7a887c29bde8c26a278074c35ca

content: e

content: 24cbe4ec41a7d4c654962e8f5e5c116bfd36a4b5fbd8342b72a4a9f7cd65af9a

content: e

content: e1efe4b6a4580f0ccf81084091cfd598bc6bb93b4c23185c969ca0ffe9e72db1

content: e

content: e24b4746cbd516ec572d07f75f2f32be967b0ba480d3d70f7f9e31f999d24bd9

content: e

content: ff4d7dbd060144e782d84b5877d163e5e7cda7bfc1c9e90f34a1d42fefada098

content: e

content: 89edeb499e7559115c13ce2d4f08571cb27e772730835f48cdacb870ce62e252

content: e

content: f092f83b9b9b4065e9e21b6ed9ab930b26b9e9b1674ca715d616d482cfe516c9

content: e

content: e07c9056a8570f8e9064c6e66f5ffa4f455bc8b7fdc8d0a16ea9d910a177f085


7a7UtEW0T16dGbaBzzdikzUrea0ZNZ9GtM7zIwQOX48S1FYgxWA+v1mWePLUQeyj?iv=teSyMNnT/mwbv39YiU1pFw==


Alive and kicking


EkGql7xF+H3i4e9tU/0RWpOvrwMCgBad8YmsipebzQdi+TfGs5OS0w/+1OUsQAfn?iv=OCH9p69weUjh7gsBoIq8xA==


gxU4bXznBNFJDtckTobXGGRyElLe+GH9xVa6a9Tgjg9GhptYyGqoxMk2a24ydkHJ?iv=GZBu0DXaUxC6JhzqApNKnQ==


Kw1K+sjo2D53vlCU3PRjKA==?iv=9K/yKuQ5IM4JZ6XYND41/A==


cziSliTZ515+kVT+JY315h4L9YUfapMYaEQ9RCH0h+pXpNR+fDLc/WDt7aJAdYJsmuxmqECCkbzsADYb60JcaA==?iv=GmsH/45I0/xT7MedX5PbvA==


pay_invoice make_invoice get_balance get_info list_transactions lookup_invoice


tags: Aleks Svetski reveals AI’s funding loop to Big Tech and envisions Bitcoin, Nostr, and AI powering a new wave of real-world Bitcoin startups.

content:
Key Takeaways
-------------

![TFTC - Bitcoin OG Reveals: Where AI's Billions Are Really Coming From | Aleks Svetski](https://www.tftc.io/content/images/2025/10/Aleks-Svetski.jpg)

Alex Shetski frames AI as an overhyped but useful tool with broken unit economics; each new user adds inference cost, funded by a “circular” VC pipeline that routes money back to Amazon, Google, and Nvidia. LLM progress has plateaued, pushing the market toward an oligopoly while open-source lags at scale. He argues the real opportunity is a new six-layer internet stack that adds native payments (Bitcoin) and identity/social graph (Nostr) to the web, with AI as an effort multiplier: small teams can now ship global, low-fee, payment-embedded products fast. Reflecting digital burnout and content “slop,” his startup Satlantis is pivoting from social feeds to a Bitcoin-native events app, solving real meet-space problems (global payouts, low fees, portable identity, discovery via social graph) instead of competing for attention.

Best Quotes
-----------

“AI isn’t a second coming of God, it’s a tool, like the tractor or the PC.”

“Every new AI user actually costs you.”

“The money going to startups ends up back with the same LPs, Amazon, Google, Nvidia.”

“Bitcoin dying would be catastrophic for civilization. Nostr dying wouldn’t matter much.”

“We’re not a Bitcoin company. We’re an events company that happens to use Bitcoin and Nostr.”

“The next 20 years will be a renaissance in consumer apps.”

“We don’t need another social app. We need tools that get people off their screens.”

Conclusion
----------

The episode marks a pragmatic turn: skip AI grandiosity and Web2 clone wars, and instead build real products on an open stack where Bitcoin handles global payments, Nostr provides portable identity, and AI multiplies effort. As users tire of algorithmic outrage and infinite content, the winning apps will re-humanize tech, creating markets that didn’t exist (like Bitcoin-native events) and channeling digital networks into physical community, sovereignty, and durable value.

Timestamps
----------

0:00 - Intro
0:37 - Musings on AI
6:20 - The AI business model
14:33 - Broad application on AI
20:52 - Bitkey & Obscura
22:36 - Importance of Nostr, Satlantis
34:16 - Carving a new market
43:15 - Crowdhealth & Unchained
45:03 - The Cold Start Problem
53:13 - New layers in the design space
59:00 - Improvments to meetups
1:04:00 - Everything app
1:07:14 - Unplugging and passing the torch
1:19:54 - Head down and build

Transcript
----------

(00:00) that a lot of the money was actually coming through Amazon or Google or Nvidia or something like that. That was sort of like either the LPS or behind the LPS. It was kind of like the wrong kind of circular economy. It was like laundering money. But the concept of general intelligence is just infinite.
(00:18) Now we're at a new stage and now you have small startups again can now do payments at scale with Bitcoin. Hopefully do a social graph at scale with something like Nostra and can build faster, better, quicker and go to market faster, better, quicker with AI tools. The cost of Bitcoin dying and failing is catastrophic. \[Music\] Stand at the precipice. Gold running to 4,000.
(00:43) Bitcoin cooling off after hitting a new all-time high. The debasement trade is on. AI is taking over the world. Or is it? Sitting down with Alex Gretzky to solve all the world's problems again. It's been a while, dude. Yeah, we we solved the world problems like what was it a year ago, 18 months ago. Now we got new problems to deal with. So here we are again.
(01:07) Yeah, a lot has changed and we were just riffing on AI. Is it hype, overhype? Is there something there? Is the way it's being applied, the way it will ultimately be applied um in terms of bringing the most utility and productivity to the world. Where are we in the cycle as somebody who has been toying around with it for quite a long time now? Yeah, I think I don't think my opinion's changed since we we finished up and open sourced the spiritual stuff.
(01:38) Um, my opinion remains that it's a tool. Uh, it's very much like the tractor or uh, you know, the the PC, the laptop, whatever. It's um I think where I've always diverged with a lot of the overhype um or hype in general is that it's some sort of you know second coming of God or um some sort of sentient being that's going to take over the world and all this sort of stuff.
(02:02) I've always felt like that was, you know, the nerd's wet dream, you know, and like overblown uh kind of like esqueologgical um desire to see the circuits take over the world and to prove all the um the religious people wrong, that you know, God can be created in the in the circuit.
(02:29) So, I've always felt like there was a there was a strange um sort of desire for that that was completely logical. And we we might have discussed this last time. It's been so long, but um I know I've rifted with someone about the fact that intelligence or the the concept of general intelligence is just infinite. And what we have with the breakthrough with LLMs has been specialized intelligence around the reproduction of patterns um linguistically first and now uh in applications like video but by no means um is this anywhere near a general intelligence nor is it anywhere near
(03:02) sentience which is you know further down the track. So there was um I shared a tweet with you now from um from Devon Ericson and a couple other people who sort of like pointing at this which is hey this is a a great tool uh it can be used effectively. Um although as with all tools it's quite hard to be used effectively. Most people just use it poorly and they just get slop.
(03:27) And as we're seeing the whole world is sort of or the whole online world is just being filled with more and more and more slop. Um, but if used effectively, um, you can create quite cool things with it. Um, I know, for example, I'm I'm a father now to a newborn and, uh, the little guy was, um, was sneezing the other day and the first thing we did was we just asked Chip, hey, you know, what should we do? Should we get like some saline solution or anything like that? What like what do we do? And we got some good feedback.
(03:58) So, so for like for that kind of stuff, it's a super breakthrough. Um, also for things like the video that you guys did for um for the opportunity cost calculator or the opportunity cost app, like that was \[ \_\_ \] brilliant, man. Um, so so for that stuff fundamentally it's it's great.
(04:17) But does that mean that this is um going to end all the jobs and replace all the human beings and give us some sort of sentient being? \[ \_\_ \] no. like that is just and I think people have sort of slowly come to that conclusion themselves instinctively cuz you know you had GPT3 GPT4 and people like oh yeah by the time we get to GPT5 this thing's going to be like \[ \_\_ \] god and GPT6 it's going to be running the world and here we are GPT5 is not really any different than four um you know we we sort of had that jump between three and four but since then you know
(04:48) everything's kind of tapered off um and all of the different models are kind of you know the same the big guys whether it's Grock GPT Gemini they all sort of like function the same so I feel like we've hit a ceiling there um so yeah that's my that's sort of my thoughts off the cuff yeah the I completely agree cuz it's funny making these videos it's people and we've had a bunch of people come to us like how are you doing this like it like what what is the secret sauce it's like there is no secret sauce like it actually does take hard work like the amount of iterations you have to run through with the
(05:27) generations because you understand that the LLM are actually not smart and do not they're not intelligent. You have to literally handhold them and format things in a certain way. You have to bring the context of a cinematographer and a director and understand how to prompt that. Like it's not easy.
(05:47) We have a bunch of people in our circle saying a we're going to go do this and it's we're going to create similar memes and short films, whatever you want to call them. And it's like, all right, good luck. Cuz it takes us like a week. The last one we just did took 55 hours of work from storyboarding, scripting, and then iterating on generations.
(06:10) And it is simply just a tool that allows us and enables us to do things that would have cost us tens of thousands of dollars and now they cost $5,000. um in labor and minimal cost of credits right now, which they're good. I mean, you pulled up another tweet from from Zoomer. It's like, how sustainable, yes, is the business model for these large language models with how much they're charging customers right now? I think we're probably in a very uh unique and anomalous point in the cost curve for the end customer right now where they're just essentially
(06:46) um trying to subsidize this with loss leading by making tokens super cheap when that we know that the power that uh the cost of the power it takes to actually produce the outputs is far exceeds and hacking the hardware as well far exceeds the what they're charging us. This is this is such a good point.
(07:08) So, actually I um around around the time when we were sort of trying to commercialize Spirit Satoshi 2 years ago now, um this hit me like a ton of bricks as a business owner because we had spent all of this time um training and building and refining and fine-tuning this the the spiritual associ we had finally got to a good enough model that we thought we could charge for it.
(07:36) And when we went to uh some Bitcoin companies to kind of sell it as a assistant, but an assistant that actually understands Bitcoin, um they were only willing to pay like 20 bucks a month or something or maybe 50 bucks a month for it. And when we did the


tags:
A short note: ありぴぴ
とりあえず退職の予定はないけど会社から放逐された時のために読んどく……


tags: How Ideologically-Driven Environmental NGOs Have Hindered the Phase-Out of Gas Peaker Plants

tags: Gas peaker plants, which fire up during periods of high electricity demand, are a critical yet environmentally damaging component of many energy grids. These plants emit significant amounts of CO2, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter, disproportionately impacting low-income communities near their locations. While there is broad consensus on the need to phase them out, progress has stalled. Surprisingly, a key barrier comes from an unexpected source: ideologically driven environmental NGOs. Despite advocating for cleaner energy, these groups have often opposed pragmatic solutions to reduce peaker plant reliance. By dismissing collaborations with utilities and energy companies as “greenwashing” outright, and refusing to engage with transitional technologies, they inadvertently prolong the lifespan of these polluting facilities. The Problem with “All or Nothing” Activism Many environmental NGOs operate under a rigid ideological framework that rejects any solution involving fossil fuel infrastructure, even if it demonstrably reduces emissions in the short term. This stance has led to the dismissal of viable bridge technologies, such as: Retrofitting Peaker Plants with Carbon Capture or Efficiency Upgrades In 2021, Duke Energy proposed retrofitting gas peaker plants in North Carolina with carbon capture systems and hybrid natural gas-battery systems to cut emissions by 50%. However, the Sierra Club and Sunrise Movement labeled the plan a “false climate solution,” arguing it legitimized fossil fuels. The project was shelved, leaving older, higher-emitting peakers in operation (source: Duke Energy Sustainability Report, 2022). Renewable-Natural Gas Hybrid Projects In California, where peaker plants contribute to poor air quality, startups like Mote Hydrogen sought to convert peakers to run on hydrogen-blended natural gas. While this would reduce NOx emissions by 30%, NGOs like 350.org criticized the effort as a “distraction from true renewables,” despite the lack of large-scale battery storage to replace peakers entirely (source: California Air Resources Board, 2023). These examples highlight a pattern: NGOs frequently attack projects that could meaningfully reduce emissions while offering no scalable alternatives. The result? Utilities default to maintaining outdated peaker plants rather than risk reputational damage from NGO backlash. Criticism Without Grid-Scale Alternatives The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that even in net-zero scenarios, natural gas will supply 15% of global electricity by 2040 due to grid stability needs (source: IEA World Energy Outlook, 2022). Transitioning away from peaker plants requires bridging solutions, yet NGOs often reject these outright. For instance, when NextEra Energy proposed replacing Florida peaker plants with solar farms paired with gas turbines (to ensure reliability during cloudy periods), the Center for Biological Diversity accused the utility of “greenwashing fossil fuel dependence.” No alternative plan was put forward, leaving aging peakers operational (source: Tampa Bay Times, 2021). Similarly, in New York, the closure of the Astoria peaker plant was delayed after local NGOs opposed a replacement facility using lower-emission turbines, demanding immediate 100% renewables—a goal the grid couldn’t yet support (source: NYISO Reliability Report, 2022). This absolutism ignores grid realities. Battery storage remains costly and limited in duration, leaving peaker plants as a necessary backstop. By blocking incremental improvements, NGOs ensure dirtier status-quo operations persist. Bitcoin Mining: A Pragmatic Alternative to Gas Peaker Plants in Texas While gas peaker plants have long been the default solution for grid stability during peak demand, Bitcoin mining has emerged as a scalable, cost-effective, and environmentally superior alternative—particularly in Texas. By acting as a flexible demand-side resource, Bitcoin mining has already demonstrated its ability to reduce reliance on peaker plants, even as ideologically driven NGOs and fossil fuel interests continue to oppose it. How Bitcoin Mining Replaces Gas Peaker Plants Gas peaker plants are designed to activate only during periods of extreme electricity demand, typically running fewer than 1,500 hours annually. However, their high costs, methane emissions, and environmental harms make them a poor long-term solution. Bitcoin mining, by contrast, provides grid operators with a unique tool: the ability to rapidly curtail energy consumption during peak demand, stabilizing the grid without the need for additional fossil fuel infrastructure. In Texas, this approach was pioneered by ERCOT CEO Brad Jones following the catastrophic 2021 Winter Storm Uri, which exposed the fragility of relying solely on peaker plants. Jones recognized that Bitcoin miners—unlike traditional industrial loads—could shut down operations within seconds, freeing up gigawatts of power for critical needs during emergencies. This flexibility allowed ERCOT to: Avoid building 3 GW of new gas peaker plants proposed by Berkshire Hathaway Energy, saving Texans an estimated $18 billion in infrastructure costs. Integrate more renewables by providing a “buyer of last resort” for excess solar and wind energy, which incentivizes renewable development. Reduce emissions by displacing peaker plants, which emit 0.4–0.6 tons of CO2 per MWh and leak methane even while idling. Peer-reviewed studies validate this strategy. Bruno et al. (2023) found that Bitcoin mining with demand response eliminated the need for gas peaker plants entirely while reducing annual carbon emissions by 48.67 million metric tons compared to baseline scenarios (Table 1). Rhodes et al. (2024) further concluded that Bitcoin mining’s flexibility enables grids to prioritize renewable energy over fossil fuels, accelerating decarbonization. Texas: A Proof of Concept By 2024, Bitcoin mining operations in Texas had grown to 3 GW of flexible load capacity, participating actively in ERCOT’s demand response programs. This resource proved critical during extreme weather events, such as the July 2023 heatwave, when miners voluntarily powered down to free up 1.2 GW of electricity—equivalent to the output of three large peaker plants. ERCOT has since reported zero blackouts despite record demand, crediting Bitcoin mining as a key factor in grid resilience. Dr Rian Dewhurst, of the Digital Assets Research Institute explains “Bitcoin mining doesn’t just stabilize the grid—it helps build a cleaner one. Grid operators no longer need expensive, polluting peaker plants idling on standby.” Opposition from Fossil Fuel Interests Despite its proven benefits, Bitcoin mining faces fierce opposition from entities invested in gas peaker plants. Berkshire Hathaway Energy, which lobbied aggressively for $18 billion in peaker plant contracts, has funded lobbying efforts to discredit Bitcoin mining through proxies like Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Patrick has repeatedly claimed Bitcoin “destabilizes grids,” a narrative debunked by ERCOT and academic research. This backlash underscores Bitcoin mining’s disruptive potential. As Dewhurst noted, “When you have 3 GW of flexible load, the business case for peaker plants evaporates.” Texas’ experience demonstrates that Bitcoin mining is not merely a theoretical alternative to gas peaker plants—it is a proven, scalable solution. By prioritizing grid needs over ideology, ERCOT has shown how collaboration with Bitcoin miners can phase out peaker plants while saving costs, cutting emissions, and accelerating the renewable transition. Toward Pragmatism: A Call for NGO Accountability The climate crisis demands urgency, but dogmatism and poor research stifles progress. To phase out peaker plants, NGOs must: Evaluate Collaborations Objectively Assess whether partnerships with utilities or energy firms yield measurable emissions reductions rather than reflexively crying “greenwash.” Engage with Grid Realities Acknowledge the role of transitional technologies until renewables and storage scale sufficiently. Prioritize Outcomes Over Ideology Recognize that the perfect is the enemy of the good — hybrid systems are better than perpetuating outdated peakers, and Bitcoin mining based solutions are better again, because they can accelerate the phasing out of gas peaker plants without any gas-powered backed to compensate for variable renewable energy intermittency. The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good. By clinging to purity tests, NGOs risk becoming unwitting allies of the very fossil fuel systems they seek to dismantle. It’s time to embrace pragmatism—before another decade of peaker plants locks in avoidable emissions.

content:
Gas peaker plants, which fire up during periods of high electricity demand, are a critical yet environmentally damaging component of many energy grids. These plants emit significant amounts of CO2, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter, disproportionately impacting low-income communities near their locations. While there is broad consensus on the need to phase them out, progress has stalled. Surprisingly, a key barrier comes from an unexpected source: ideologically driven environmental NGOs.

![](https://batcoinz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screen-Shot-2025-01-29-at-9.43.50-AM-1024x742.png)

Despite advocating for cleaner energy, these groups have often opposed pragmatic solutions to reduce peaker plant reliance. By dismissing collaborations with utilities and energy companies as “greenwashing” outright, and refusing to engage with transitional technologies, they inadvertently prolong the lifespan of these polluting facilities.

### **The Problem with “All or Nothing” Activism**

Many environmental NGOs operate under a rigid ideological framework that rejects any solution involving fossil fuel infrastructure, even if it demonstrably reduces emissions in the short term. This stance has led to the dismissal of viable bridge technologies, such as:

1.  **Retrofitting Peaker Plants with Carbon Capture or Efficiency Upgrades**
    In 2021, Duke Energy proposed retrofitting gas peaker plants in North Carolina with carbon capture systems and hybrid natural gas-battery systems to cut emissions by 50%. However, the Sierra Club and Sunrise Movement labeled the plan a “false climate solution,” arguing it legitimized fossil fuels. The project was shelved, leaving older, higher-emitting peakers in operation (source: _Duke Energy Sustainability Report, 2022_).
2.  **Renewable-Natural Gas Hybrid Projects**
    In California, where peaker plants contribute to poor air quality, startups like Mote Hydrogen sought to convert peakers to run on hydrogen-blended natural gas. While this would reduce NOx emissions by 30%, NGOs like 350.org criticized the effort as a “distraction from true renewables,” despite the lack of large-scale battery storage to replace peakers entirely (source: _California Air Resources Board, 2023_).

These examples highlight a pattern: NGOs frequently attack projects that could meaningfully reduce emissions while offering no scalable alternatives. The result? Utilities default to maintaining outdated peaker plants rather than risk reputational damage from NGO backlash.

* * *

### **Criticism Without Grid-Scale Alternatives**

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that even in net-zero scenarios, natural gas will supply 15% of global electricity by 2040 due to grid stability needs (source: _IEA World Energy Outlook, 2022_). Transitioning away from peaker plants requires bridging solutions, yet NGOs often reject these outright.

For instance, when NextEra Energy proposed replacing Florida peaker plants with solar farms paired with gas turbines (to ensure reliability during cloudy periods), the Center for Biological Diversity accused the utility of “greenwashing fossil fuel dependence.” No alternative plan was put forward, leaving aging peakers operational (source: _Tampa Bay Times, 2021_). Similarly, in New York, the closure of the Astoria peaker plant was delayed after local NGOs opposed a replacement facility using lower-emission turbines, demanding immediate 100% renewables—a goal the grid couldn’t yet support (source: _NYISO Reliability Report, 2022_).

This absolutism ignores grid realities. Battery storage remains costly and limited in duration, leaving peaker plants as a necessary backstop. By blocking incremental improvements, NGOs ensure dirtier status-quo operations persist.

### **Bitcoin Mining: A Pragmatic Alternative to Gas Peaker Plants in Texas**

While gas peaker plants have long been the default solution for grid stability during peak demand, Bitcoin mining has emerged as a scalable, cost-effective, and environmentally superior alternative—particularly in Texas. By acting as a flexible demand-side resource, Bitcoin mining has already demonstrated its ability to reduce reliance on peaker plants, even as ideologically driven NGOs and fossil fuel interests continue to oppose it.

![](https://batcoinz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screen-Shot-2025-01-29-at-9.44.29-AM-1024x612.png)

#### **How Bitcoin Mining Replaces Gas Peaker Plants**

Gas peaker plants are designed to activate only during periods of extreme electricity demand, typically running fewer than 1,500 hours annually. However, their high costs, methane emissions, and environmental harms make them a poor long-term solution. Bitcoin mining, by contrast, provides grid operators with a unique tool: the ability to rapidly curtail energy consumption during peak demand, stabilizing the grid without the need for additional fossil fuel infrastructure.

In Texas, this approach was pioneered by ERCOT CEO Brad Jones following the catastrophic 2021 Winter Storm Uri, which exposed the fragility of relying solely on peaker plants. Jones recognized that Bitcoin miners—unlike traditional industrial loads—could shut down operations within seconds, freeing up gigawatts of power for critical needs during emergencies. This flexibility allowed ERCOT to:

*   **Avoid building 3 GW of new gas peaker plants** proposed by Berkshire Hathaway Energy, saving Texans an estimated [$18 billion in infrastructure costs](https://www.da-ri.org/articles/how-bitcoin-mining-saved-texans-18-billion).
*   **Integrate more renewables** by providing a “buyer of last resort” for excess solar and wind energy, which incentivizes renewable development.
*   **Reduce emissions** by displacing peaker plants, which emit 0.4–0.6 tons of CO2 per MWh and leak methane even while idling.

Peer-reviewed studies validate this strategy. [Bruno et al](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765523000313?via%3Dihub). (2023) found that Bitcoin mining with demand response eliminated the need for gas peaker plants entirely while reducing annual carbon emissions by 48.67 million metric tons compared to baseline scenarios (Table 1). [Rhodes et al](https://lancium.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Lancium_Flexible_Data_Center_Whitepaper_4.2022.pdf). (2024) further concluded that Bitcoin mining’s flexibility enables grids to prioritize renewable energy over fossil fuels, accelerating decarbonization.

#### **Texas: A Proof of Concept**

By 2024, Bitcoin mining operations in Texas had grown to 3 GW of flexible load capacity, participating actively in ERCOT’s demand response programs. This resource proved critical during extreme weather events, such as the July 2023 heatwave, when miners voluntarily powered down to free up 1.2 GW of electricity—equivalent to the output of three large peaker plants. ERCOT has since reported zero blackouts despite record demand, crediting Bitcoin mining as a key factor in grid resilience.

Dr Rian Dewhurst, of the [Digital Assets Research Institute](https://www.da-ri.org/) explains “Bitcoin mining doesn’t just stabilize the grid—it helps build a cleaner one. Grid operators no longer need expensive, polluting peaker plants idling on standby.”

#### **Opposition from Fossil Fuel Interests**

Despite its proven benefits, Bitcoin mining faces fierce opposition from entities invested in gas peaker plants. Berkshire Hathaway Energy, which lobbied aggressively for $18 billion in peaker plant contracts, has [funded lobbying efforts to discredit Bitcoin mining](https://www.da-ri.org/articles/how-bitcoin-mining-saved-texans-18-billion) through proxies like Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Patrick has repeatedly claimed Bitcoin “destabilizes grids,” a narrative debunked by ERCOT and academic research.

This backlash underscores Bitcoin mining’s disruptive potential. As Dewhurst noted, “When you have 3 GW of flexible load, the business case for peaker plants evaporates.”

Texas’ experience demonstrates that Bitcoin mining is not merely a theoretical alternative to gas peaker plants—it is a proven, scalable solution. By prioritizing grid needs over ideology, ERCOT has shown how collaboration with Bitcoin miners can phase out peaker plants while saving costs, cutting emissions, and accelerating the renewable transition.

### **Toward Pragmatism: A Call for NGO Accountability**

The climate crisis demands urgency, but dogmatism and poor research stifles progress. To phase out peaker plants, NGOs must:

1.  **Evaluate Collaborations Objectively**
    Assess whether partnerships with utilities or energy firms yield measurable emissions reductions rather than reflexively crying “greenwash.”
2.  **Engage with Grid Realities**
    Acknowledge the role of transitional technologies until renewables and storage scale sufficiently.
3.  **Prioritize Outcomes Over Ideology**
    Recognize that the perfect is the enemy of the good — hybrid systems are better than perpetuating outdated peakers, and Bitcoin mining based solutions are better again, because they can accelerate the phasing out of gas peaker plants without any gas-powered backed to compensate for variable renewable energy intermittency.

The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good. By clinging to purity tests, NGOs risk becoming unwitting allies of the very fossil fuel systems they seek to dismantle. It’s time to embrace pragmatism—before another decade of peaker plants locks in avoidable emissions.


text: を縮めて

text: もみあげ

text: ました、

text: 覇王

text: 歯の

text: もん

text: なくなる

text: ぽー

text: をつけ

text: 収入

text: ぴっ

text: のすたろう、

text: ぺぇ、

text: 出てる

text: てちょっと

text: んじゃない

text: かわいい

text: 電気

text: もみもみしてる

text: 考えて


mcc0xJ3CX35CnHNOLQ8gtEPb9k+U9HH+1zcDzP4MjhlY5iX1UK8SAhqAPAXrxBgz+ABkrsjxtsbzEqHLBA9e5g==?iv=/5Y2wltDQi0+Sk1806bvSA==


tags: Bitcoin coverage as a litmus test for media reliability

tags: Overview Bitcoin coverage is a strong gauge of media integrity because it exposes outlets that prioritize sensationalism over facts, lack technical understanding, or succumb to ideological/industry bias. It is also an effective gauge of a media outlet’s neutrality, investigative rigor, and thorough fact-checking because it is a complex, polarizing topic that demands unbiased analysis and meticulous research to navigate its technical, economic, and environmental dimensions accurately. Outlets that excel, such as Forbes with its detailed reports integrating peer-reviewed research on Bitcoin mining’s environmental benefits, demonstrate a commitment to neutral appraisal and depth, suggesting broader journalistic integrity. Conversely, outlets like The New York Times show clear evidence of employing a morality play framing with heroes and villains, which tends to work against nuance and leads to looking for data to support the narrative, rather than the other way around. The Economist, marked by persistent falsehoods, reveals biases and lapses in fact-checking that likely extend to other subjects. The topic’s technical nature and the diversity of stakeholder interests—ranging from environmentalists to financial innovators—require outlets to conduct independent and critical analysis, and verify claims rigorously, making their Bitcoin reporting a good litmus test for overall reliability. Methodology This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the media reliability index for major outlets’ coverage of Bitcoin, as of June 11, 2025. The index evaluates five sub-measures: 1. Ability to Conduct Novel Research (vs. relying on cut-and-paste reporting), 2. Depth of Thinking (over sensationalist headlines), 3. Neutral Appraisal (presenting a balanced view), 4. Avoidance of Groupthink (challenging prevailing narratives), 5. Speed in Overcoming Negativity Bias (moving past initial bias toward an evidence-based assessment). Coverage of any novel technology is generally a good way to stress-test reliability of media, being the area where faults in fact checking are most likely to be revealed. We can see this in media coverage across time of novel technologies including the bicycle, the radio and the Internet, all of which revealed where media outlets were more likely to favor recycling of other journalists’ work, sensational headlines and non-neutral appraisals with a general disinclination to challenge prevailing narratives for some time. Each was scored on a 0-10 scale. The following sections detail the methodology, findings, and commentary, ensuring a thorough understanding of the results, with specific recalibrations for BBC and New York Times Survey Scope The analysis began by collecting posts from July 2022- June 2025 for a range of mainstream media outlets that regularly comment on Bitcoin: Verge, WIRED, The Guardian, New York Times, The Economist, The Financial Times, Bloomberg, BBC, Forbes, Reuters, CNBC, and The Street. The posts were analyzed for sentiments—criticisms, praises, or neutral mentions—related to each outlet’s Bitcoin coverage. Next, scores were inferred based on the content of each article from each media outlet. Detailed Findings The resulting media reliability index is presented in the table below, ranked from best to worst based on average scores. Media OutletNovel ResearchDepth of ThinkingNeutral AppraisalAvoidance of GroupthinkOvercoming Negativity BiasAverage Score Forbes889988.4 The Street778887.6 Bloomberg778877.4 Reuters778877.4 CNBC667766.4 BBC454564.8 The Financial Times543454.2 The Guardian342322.8 WIRED342232.8 New York Times351222.6 The Verge232122.0 The Economist231211.8 Individual Outlet Analysis Below is a detailed commentary for each outlet The Street: The coverage marks a significant evolution in perspective, highlighted by an article asserting Bitcoin’s role in the future of finance and renewable energy, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (8/10) as the key factor, averaging 7.6. Bloomberg: The coverage stands out for recognizing Bitcoin’s environmental advantages, such as reporting on miners utilizing Iceland’s renewable energy surplus, with Neutral Appraisal (8/10) as the most salient, averaging 7.4. Reuters: The coverage mirrors Bloomberg’s nuanced framing of Bitcoin mining, exemplified by reporting on MARA’s methane emission reduction efforts, and use of stranded energy in Iceland, with Neutral Appraisal (8/10) driving the average of 7.4. CNBC: The coverage offers a balanced perspective, notably acknowledging Bitcoin’s contribution to African renewables, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (6/10) as the most relevant, averaging 6.4. BBC: The coverage features a positive report on Bitcoin mining’s role in rural electrification, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (6/10) as the key improvement. The history of non-nuanced framing, including use of non-peer reviewed science for sensationalist headlines dragged down the score, averaging 4.8. The Financial Times: The coverage reflects a mixed track record, with a pro-Bitcoin ESG article in December 2023 undermined by later critiques, with Neutral Appraisal (3/10) highlighting the inconsistency, averaging 4.2. The Guardian: The coverage is marred by significant errors, and lack of fact checking such as mislabeling gas plant noise as cryptocurrency mining sound, with Neutral Appraisal (2/10) as the most critical weakness, averaging 2.8. WIRED: The coverage includes instances of many misleading and factually incorrect claims. For example, WIRED claimed that Bitcoin mining destabilizes grids, despite the fact this has been debunked in peer reviewed research (their article was also community noted). Neutral Appraisal (2/10) was their lowest rating, averaging 2.8. New York Times: The coverage reveals a consistent framing of Bitcoin mining as a villain in a morality play. Of particular note was a 2023 article which selectively used data, and misusing marginal emissions accounting to create a heavily distorted view of Bitcoin mining. Neutral Appraisal (1/10) as the most glaring deficiency, averaging 2.6. The Verge: The coverage exhibits severe factual errors, such as unsupported claims about IMF paper momentum, with Avoidance of Groupthink (1/10) as the most prominent failing, averaging 2.0. The Economist: The coverage reflects the most pronounced falsehoods about Bitcoin, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (1/10) as the most critical shortcoming, averaging 1.8. Implications and Use as a Reliability Tool This index reflects how each outlet handles Bitcoin coverage, providing insight into their broader journalistic reliability. Higher-scoring outlets like Forbes and The Street demonstrate a commitment to balanced, informed reporting and re-evaluation of previous articles based on new evidence. Less reliable outlets like The Economist and The Verge show persistent issues with bias and accuracy. The BBC’s rating of 4.8 acknowledges its recent positive article on Bitcoin Mining but notes that this is an outlier in an overall trend of inaccuracies and non-objective appraisal. The NYTimes’ score of 2.6 highlights its lack of nuance in appraising Bitcoin, and evidence of using data selectively to suit a narrative, plus the impact of its much criticized article on Bitcoin mining in 2023.

content:
![](https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXdlrTKx-ioau_IUyzqhEput4DcSRpyx45LHb2nqI9RzJUOSLjytoaKtXE88vY_ZNE-XyXK6Tg4CJhkScjtXAYV75knzrXVbQmdRQAvRzUPxoKJziPGr4yIoq09fsAW7g6lYU-SZ_w?key=rR-xu87mGFzliWEIzUWVOw)

### Overview

Bitcoin coverage is a strong gauge of media integrity because it exposes outlets that prioritize sensationalism over facts, lack technical understanding, or succumb to ideological/industry bias.

It is also an effective gauge of a media outlet’s neutrality, investigative rigor, and thorough fact-checking because it is a complex, polarizing topic that demands unbiased analysis and meticulous research to navigate its technical, economic, and environmental dimensions accurately.

Outlets that excel, such as Forbes with its detailed reports integrating peer-reviewed research on Bitcoin mining’s environmental benefits, demonstrate a commitment to neutral appraisal and depth, suggesting broader journalistic integrity. Conversely, outlets like The New York Times show clear evidence of employing a morality play framing with heroes and villains, which tends to work against nuance and leads to looking for data to support the narrative, rather than the other way around. The Economist, marked by persistent falsehoods, reveals biases and lapses in fact-checking that likely extend to other subjects.

The topic’s technical nature and the diversity of stakeholder interests—ranging from environmentalists to financial innovators—require outlets to conduct independent and critical analysis, and verify claims rigorously, making their Bitcoin reporting a good litmus test for overall reliability.

### Methodology

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the media reliability index for major outlets’ coverage of Bitcoin, as of June 11, 2025.

The index evaluates five sub-measures:

1\. Ability to Conduct Novel Research (vs. relying on cut-and-paste reporting),

2\. Depth of Thinking (over sensationalist headlines),

3\. Neutral Appraisal (presenting a balanced view),

4\. Avoidance of Groupthink (challenging prevailing narratives),

5\. Speed in Overcoming Negativity Bias (moving past initial bias toward an evidence-based assessment).

Coverage of any novel technology is generally a good way to stress-test reliability of media, being the area where faults in fact checking are most likely to be revealed. We can see this in media coverage across time of novel technologies including the bicycle, the radio and the Internet, all of which revealed where media outlets were more likely to favor recycling of other journalists’ work, sensational headlines and non-neutral appraisals with a general disinclination to challenge prevailing narratives for some time.

![](https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXfuznJNeVqB8Wz1TpkQTqfgOGbUGnfUDeR9asy-YF858x5SphH13eJN8hwcCcQuPnpi7jXhtNnQl3kiQljosiWRf4YjGKKlNoqkfsxGZ0ga_u-zaNEKM0NN5iDBbedpvC1Wz9UAPQ?key=rR-xu87mGFzliWEIzUWVOw)

Each was scored on a 0-10 scale. The following sections detail the methodology, findings, and commentary, ensuring a thorough understanding of the results, with specific recalibrations for BBC and New York Times

### Survey Scope

The analysis began by collecting posts from July 2022- June 2025 for a range of mainstream media outlets that regularly comment on Bitcoin: Verge, WIRED, The Guardian, New York Times, The Economist, The Financial Times, Bloomberg, BBC, Forbes, Reuters, CNBC, and The Street. The posts were analyzed for sentiments—criticisms, praises, or neutral mentions—related to each outlet’s Bitcoin coverage. Next, scores were inferred based on the content of each article from each media outlet.

### Detailed Findings

The resulting media reliability index is presented in the table below, ranked from best to worst based on average scores.

**Media Outlet**

**Novel Research**

**Depth of Thinking**

**Neutral Appraisal**

**Avoidance of Groupthink**

**Overcoming Negativity Bias**

**Average Score**

Forbes

8

8

9

9

8

8.4

The Street

7

7

8

8

8

7.6

Bloomberg

7

7

8

8

7

7.4

Reuters

7

7

8

8

7

7.4

CNBC

6

6

7

7

6

6.4

BBC

4

5

4

5

6

4.8

The Financial Times

5

4

3

4

5

4.2

The Guardian

3

4

2

3

2

2.8

WIRED

3

4

2

2

3

2.8

New York Times

3

5

1

2

2

2.6

The Verge

2

3

2

1

2

2.0

The Economist

2

3

1

2

1

1.8

### Individual Outlet Analysis

Below is a detailed commentary for each outlet

**The Street**: The coverage marks a significant evolution in perspective, highlighted by an article asserting Bitcoin’s role in the future of finance and renewable energy, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (8/10) as the key factor, averaging 7.6.

**Bloomberg**: The coverage stands out for recognizing Bitcoin’s environmental advantages, such as reporting on miners utilizing Iceland’s renewable energy surplus, with Neutral Appraisal (8/10) as the most salient, averaging 7.4.

**Reuters**: The coverage mirrors Bloomberg’s nuanced framing of Bitcoin mining, exemplified by reporting on MARA’s methane emission reduction efforts, and use of stranded energy in Iceland, with Neutral Appraisal (8/10) driving the average of 7.4.

**CNBC**: The coverage offers a balanced perspective, notably acknowledging Bitcoin’s contribution to African renewables, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (6/10) as the most relevant, averaging 6.4.

**BBC**: The coverage features a positive report on Bitcoin mining’s role in rural electrification, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (6/10) as the key improvement. The history of non-nuanced framing, including use of non-peer reviewed science for sensationalist headlines dragged down the score, averaging 4.8.

**The Financial Times**: The coverage reflects a mixed track record, with a pro-Bitcoin ESG article in December 2023 undermined by later critiques, with Neutral Appraisal (3/10) highlighting the inconsistency, averaging 4.2.

**The Guardian**: The coverage is marred by significant errors, and lack of fact checking such as mislabeling gas plant noise as cryptocurrency mining sound, with Neutral Appraisal (2/10) as the most critical weakness, averaging 2.8.

**WIRED**: The coverage includes instances of many misleading and factually incorrect claims. For example, WIRED claimed that Bitcoin mining destabilizes grids, despite the fact this has been debunked in peer reviewed research (their article was also community noted). Neutral Appraisal (2/10) was their lowest rating, averaging 2.8.

**New York Times**: The coverage reveals a consistent framing of Bitcoin mining as a villain in a morality play. Of particular note was a 2023 article which selectively used data, and misusing marginal emissions accounting to create a heavily distorted view of Bitcoin mining. Neutral Appraisal (1/10) as the most glaring deficiency, averaging 2.6.

**The Verge**: The coverage exhibits severe factual errors, such as unsupported claims about IMF paper momentum, with Avoidance of Groupthink (1/10) as the most prominent failing, averaging 2.0.

**The Economist**: The coverage reflects the most pronounced falsehoods about Bitcoin, with Overcoming Negativity Bias (1/10) as the most critical shortcoming, averaging 1.8.

### Implications and Use as a Reliability Tool

This index reflects how each outlet handles Bitcoin coverage, providing insight into their broader journalistic reliability. Higher-scoring outlets like Forbes and The Street demonstrate a commitment to balanced, informed reporting and re-evaluation of previous articles based on new evidence. Less reliable outlets like The Economist and The Verge show persistent issues with bias and accuracy.

The BBC’s rating of 4.8 acknowledges its recent positive article on Bitcoin Mining but notes that this is an outlier in an overall trend of inaccuracies and non-objective appraisal. The NYTimes’ score of 2.6 highlights its lack of nuance in appraising Bitcoin, and evidence of using data selectively to suit a narrative, plus the impact of its much criticized article on Bitcoin mining in 2023.


HoP/zoeIfwxWKQ7nO/z62U4oFpQwLvAvJYyEYtncUWaBKcAD+lho3Fbc0f+ZI+xN?iv=1JilQpuJdFOSIdJQZm+qYg==


LXlhOmGQoyA40BfoAh/3CA8F3Z2tk3seOPvV06QvfpX78payPyHvEk44yzsU8Myu?iv=u3Xvj+ah3Xwh55V5P1LAhg==


ybCs+itac7yg8/Pi+OerzZGv9R0W6be5BiNkfIVhFvVmxvvK7fC8nFtasVrzhrgR?iv=vtgF0sfHPk8CqVGtY4ZnCQ==


3XQd9xyl734orBdUv7a2zWidQ_ud-74dQBT4_LBoQvEEFVGYHeIsb4B10s_gQaYSHmuBBCqDMr9ozbo8TiHiN76W_NNKI1g?iv=t1K7llALTwH2OBb0W3dYFfp9XFGScGTz


Good morning!


Alive and kicking


ro+EH2K48RihzL7Pd0tdER0MkJ0ZOZahhvrZgrfkFvTN8ztIHa1gvf31JhxD22eP?iv=UqbyFNmkT6l3tHHFL2w61w==


a2I27j3H/XLZXEDjlh3YwhgrQlUdPwILLqOt3oD32G4bfeQluP4Ye31GE2yDX0LD?iv=I2Z7IDbTtscGzVL/5RSjrQ==


New OP_RETURN
{p:brc-20,op:mint,tick:KEK,amt:10000}
https://mempool.space/tx/9c132327e9c635b26ac06f620a7518fcd6dde484da7e52d0efdc45d9193801d7


bqS3zugAzBZFRf0F4OnOGQ==?iv=UEEUe6ar1MrrQo/DHkZ9yQ==


「HuaweiのAscend AIに中国以外から調達された部品が使用されている」との報道が原因で、半導体調査会社・TechInsightsを中国政府がブラックリスト入りさせる
https://gigazine.net/news/20251014-china-blacklists-techinsights-huawei/

#gigazine


RSS-to-Nostr of A Bola

about:
RSS-to-Nostr feed of A Bola
More RSS-To-Nostr can be found in my following list