I guess that's understandable. That makes more sense than any other explanation I've been given about 0 sat utxos. Now, what about confiscation?
Post by shruggr ✪
Have coins been confiscated? I understand the concern of the association policy, but I’m not convinced that an alert would actually be honored. Any such action risks a spilt and has real potential cost to miners
327 198 sat
What the chain says
- Block
- 960 016
- Time
- 2026-07-29T21:10:51Z
- Signer
- 12zCJp8pS3QKFQHWhRPKd6HHZQRR7qsWGg
- App
- twetch
- Type
- reply
- Content type
- text/markdown
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
12zCJp8pS3QKFQHWhRPKd6HHZQRR7qsWGg UnverifiedReplies (9)
It’s probabilistic turtles all the way down. We can never be certain how the future plays out, but the economics drive all such decisions
327 198 sat
If it goes to scale, I 100% guarantee confiscation will be used since Craig basically "added" it. That's why I think this is franken-Bitcoin too. I genuinely think non-confiscatable Bitcoin must be an existential threat that has been disallowed by the powers that be.
This is mischaracterized. Nodes could move coins in the original protocol via a simple "1Return" script. Satoshi patched it when it was discovered in the wild, so it was possible to do before (I think it was) 2010.
Re-eneabling nodes to coordinate and giving them a way higher threshold for the act of doing it is a net good, imo.
Yeah it has to be.
326 797 sat
Yes. We showed the BSVA policy to our attorney, and he said it could only be honored if it was domesticated to a Florida court order, and coordinated to the jurisdictions of every other mining operation.
This is a very high threshold, and the process would apply just as much to BTC as to BSV.
In fact, the protocol is fully functional on any bitcoin-based network.
So, it's a super outside possibility that it ever gets used, and if it ever did, the precedent applies just as much to any bitcoin-style chain as it does to BSV. @51413
Wen twonksuit?
654 932 sat
I think co-ordination in the future, at scale, is inevitable. Even between countries. So I think confiscation/reallocation is inevitable at scale, in the future.
I also think that's a good thing, because again, I'm leaning heavily towards "Bitcoin without confiscation is an existential threat". Criminal networks, etc..
Better to have confiscation than risk billions of deaths (Yes, I think this might be possible and has been predicted, with non-confiscatable Bitcoin).
327 600 sat