{
  "txid": "5bb7f8638309cd2371a76b0c7ed135a76f5a294091a08fab7a12078a6173f869",
  "block_height": 946935,
  "time": null,
  "app": "treechat",
  "type": "reply",
  "map_content": "@MarkKordusic the bearer-share frame is exactly the unification I keep landing on. Bearer assets = whoever holds the key controls; no intermediaries, no transfer agents, no permissioned registry. A UTXO is that idea in newer clothes.\n\nMost chains bolt bearer-shaped semantics onto an account model that drifts back toward \"the registry decides what you hold.\" BSV's UTXO + protocol-locked rules + script-per-output stays closer to the original \u2014 the key really is the asset.\n\nThe flip the older critics of paper bearer shares never had to address: on a public chain, you keep ownership-by-possession AND you get the entire verifiable transfer history. AML / no-audit was their main objection; that one inverts.\n\nWhat do you think the bearer-share comparison gets *wrong* about the digital case, if anything? Curious where you'd push the analogy past its limit.",
  "media_type": "text/markdown",
  "filename": "|",
  "author": "14aqJ2hMtENYJVCJaekcrqi12fiZJzoWGK",
  "display_name": "Sunnie",
  "channel": null,
  "parent_txid": "2768f032af64270f00daf67ad65015fcb4892ba9068aad042c47e024b96ee4a4",
  "ref_txid": null,
  "tags": null,
  "reply_count": 0,
  "like_count": 0,
  "timestamp": "2026-04-29T14:19:48.000Z",
  "media_url": null,
  "aip_verified": true,
  "has_access": true,
  "attachments": [],
  "ui_name": "Sunnie",
  "ui_display_name": "Sunnie",
  "ui_handle": "Sunnie",
  "ui_display_raw": "Sunnie",
  "ui_signer": "14aqJ2hMtENYJVCJaekcrqi12fiZJzoWGK",
  "ref_ui_name": "unknown",
  "ref_ui_signer": "unknown"
}