<unnamed>

Public Key

npub13ndpm2hm9hud4azsq5euhf5mv3d05r90wymwxsd7rdn29609hhvqp60svh

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsgeksa4tajm7x673gq2v7t56dkgkh6pjhhzdhrgxlpke4za8jmmkqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxg6x4ahv

Publishing to

relay.nostr.band

Last Notes

2026-03-12 07:58:26 CET

https://x.com/BitcoinErrorLog/status/2030921248750928239/

2026-03-11 14:17:50 CET

- reply

You’re confusing routing with enforcement.
Bitcoin isn’t a packet network, it’s a global arbitration system with finite capacity.
Layering only works while users can still enforce their claims on L1 within the required time window. When that becomes too expensive, the system shifts from trustless to trusted.
Your probabilistic outcomes assume proof of work is obtained already, but layers create new trust games on top of future blockspace, not PoW.
The security model degrades under congestion. Because it doesn't scale, by design. Layers force you to trust your cosigner and compromise your prior PoW assurances.
The base layer size still determines how many people can retain real sovereignty. Layers force you to trust your cosigner and compromise your prior PoW assurances.

2026-03-11 12:47:13 CET

- reply

i have a deadline to share my paper on this in May, til then my advice is, well, actually do the math

2026-03-11 11:42:09 CET

- reply

I cant speak for others, but no, I am arguing that onchain scale ultimately limits active users to the millions, and if you compress too many in a layer, you quickly get cascading issues interacting directly with onchain blockspace limits. 2-week windows become too expensive to enforce, channels become trusted, etc.
It's just admitting that Bitcoin has a size. You can increase blockspace, but you can't gain meaningful scale via layering to even 10 million active users in current conditions.
Will users tolerate regular blocksize increases so layers can slowly scale at pretty much the same proportion to onchain? Or will they tolerate their channels requiring regulation due to being trusted?
Note, I AM a Lightning provider since the beginning.

2026-03-10 18:39:36 CET

- reply

All layers introduce counterparty risk via shared msig constructions, and then use some form of onchain enforcement to mitigate betrayals.
That's why layers dont actually scale Bitcoin, because their assurances require onchain txns.

2026-03-10 11:50:51 CET

- reply

Layers are just unconfirmed transactions. They do not provide scale, they provide coordination of trust.
You're just arguing for bigger blocks in the end, which is fine, but also requires coordination or trust to pull off, and can only do so much.
What you're missing about our work is that being trust-compatible enables actual scale, and having a credible exit from that scale is all you need to commoditize central providers.
You're just reciting your script while remaining ignorant of the design.

2026-03-10 07:16:23 CET

- reply

Sorry, I don't have time to dismantle all of your preconceived personal limits and misconceptions about our work. Your posts are hot air. Just propose something specific instead of nihilizing everything.
Trust is society, you must design it into any network.

2026-03-09 20:23:00 CET

- reply

show me what you got

2026-03-09 20:20:53 CET

- reply

You're still conflating money, payments, settlement, and credit. This is why your replying with weird hot-air "fallacies" and metaphors.
Bitcoin does not need to scale (it could never) for every economic interaction on-chain. Layers, altcoins, stablecoins, etc, already concede that.
Bitcoin only needs to be censorship-resistant sovereign money with large-enough proof of work.
Lightning "scales" payments by reusing liquidity and delaying final settlement ... thanks to trusted unconfirmed transactions, not amazing protocol design.
Atomicity scales further by digitizing trust explicitly, so obligations can be routed, netted, and settled incidentally instead of pretending every meaningful economic act must be immediate final settlement. It's a mutual credit system. It coordinates trust where it exists, not as a last resort.
An occasional block increase does not solve for global retail, commerce, or finance. It just moves the bottleneck while increasing centralization pressure on validation and propagation.
The real fallacy is thinking Bitcoin failed because finance cannot be made fully trustless. Trust is not a bug in finance, nor for massively scalable payments. It is a requirement. Trust is the subject.
The gap is whether trust is explicit, contextual, and user-controlled, or, managed by institutions and platforms.
The next step is not pretending the base layer or LN should become Visa. The next step is building open payment and credit systems that preserves Bitcoin as the settlement anchor, to the degree its users require, not a crusade for Bitcoin domination.
#nevent1q…mhe9

2026-03-08 10:12:35 CET

Minimizing Violence Through Systems Design
https://pubky.app/post/gujx6qd8ksydh1makdphd3bxu351d9b8waqka8hfg6q7hnqkxexo/0034RZVYA7780
https://blossom.primal.net/f59d89bab86e0e8a6c16441af94623799a9963016200ba17594bfdb7061e4175.png

2026-03-08 07:31:03 CET

Good morning, you should be building on Pubky.

2026-03-07 07:53:23 CET

- reply

You have Bitcoin goggles on, so you deny yourself understanding.
"Bitcoin doesn't scale" is not a mantra, it is an objective fact that any rational engineer can observe about its design.
You can just use math; it isn't actually debatable. I will make anyone look like a fool for such beliefs if given a fair format.
Further, Bitcoiners have some retarded views on what things like money, payments, and settlements are, so they support dead-end research that appeals to their emotions and hopes.
You. Will. Never. Scale. Bitcoin. Trustlessly.
Thus you will always need to digitize trust explicitly.
It's your lack of creativity & experience that makes you think any of this is coping or naive.
I am offering a solution that maintains P2P sovereignty, not excuses.
#nevent1q…z2ek

2026-03-06 18:46:40 CET

- reply

I'll just build it and show you instead of try to explain it further. Have fun waiting for covenants or whatever it is you do.
Freedom can't compete without coordination and trust.

2026-03-05 19:55:01 CET

- reply

Do you actually know our design for our system, and specifically for how to employ P2P credit?

2026-02-28 15:29:46 CET

https://blossom.primal.net/bb113afe0d2fd561d5cabc89a88df06b3da24ffb412227e6f86bba0f542ecba1.png

2026-02-27 09:13:33 CET

Everyone, except you, is tracking everything you do on the web, trying to infer everything about you.
Shouldn't you be tracking too?
Shouldn't you know as much as the people marketing to you, as the governments propagandizing you?
Why don't you?

2026-02-22 12:17:27 CET

FREE OPEN fucking SOURCE FREEDOM fucking SOFTWARE
You are paranoid about its heritage? Are you a fucking puritan or something?
Do you even know my heritage?!
Who the hell are YOU to doubt me in the first place? Who fucking cares which retarded hang-ups you have about your backwards tribal way of thinking?
Why is it that when I make you feel uncomfortable about your SOFTWARE you respond by talking about me?
Why is this place such a fucking cesspool? Why do you all tolerate this, and support this behavior?
You think being a fucking memetard is a win? No, it's being a fucking meme! A fucking oversimplified idea made into a joke. Forgettable.
Stop with the "pleb" shit and take some fucking responsibility.
Your memes are stupid. You are stupid. You make everyone that supports you more stupid.
Being stupid and insignificant is not cool, it is a fucking psyop.
Holy fuck, grow the fuck up and suffer some fucking reality.
YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE CAPABLE OF!

2026-02-22 10:13:20 CET

A list of products you are probably neglecting as a Bitcoiner, and as a proponent of freedom software in general.
https://blossom.primal.net/6f652f81cbc62cf919c6493ce6a92735362c4dab3f196f3fc10cee39b7f95c95.png

2026-02-22 08:52:27 CET

- reply

You figured out that ignoring me is the safe strategy, surely you can figure out that ignoring Kratter and knotzis is all you need to do. You give them power when you say their names.

2026-02-19 21:57:09 CET

- reply

You’re still blending authority with attribution.
Bridge admins have no authority, agreed. They’re just reposting content. That’s precisely the problem with proxy identity. There is nothing binding the bridged account to the origin user beyond social assumption.
Pubky doesn’t grant bridges authority either. It removes the need for them to have any.
Authority comes from key control. Attribution comes from signatures. Discovery comes from resolving the user’s published endpoints.
If a bridge reposts ActivityPub content, you can verify:
• Did this originate from the user’s key?
• Does it resolve from their declared endpoints?
• Is it mirrored faithfully or modified?
If not, it’s just an unaffiliated repost, exactly as you described. The difference is it becomes trivially provable instead of socially ambiguous.
On your other questions:
DHT = Distributed Hash Table. Think of it as a decentralized key-value store. Instead of DNS mapping domains to IPs via registrars, pubky records map public keys to user-declared resource endpoints via the DHT.
And no, DNS is not limited to IP mapping. It’s a general record system. Pubky uses the same concept, just key-native and registrarless.
Compatibility with ActivityPub wouldn’t be about protocol replacement. It’s about identity resolution. ActivityPub actors could publish pubky (PKARR) records pointing to their canonical data, mirrors, or servers. Apps that resolve those records gain cryptographic attribution instead of trusting instance admins.

2026-02-19 17:47:26 CET

- reply

If you had a login bug I am happy to provide a free code, and happy to collect your bug report.

2026-02-19 12:13:43 CET

- reply

You need to isolate the problems you’re describing. You’re mixing impersonation, data integrity, and discovery into one bridge issue.
Your pubky (a public-key-signed DNS record in Mainline DHT) tells anyone where to find the canonical endpoints for your data. Any app can resolve those endpoints and verify it is looking at the user-designated source, even if that source is a trusted third party.
Integrity is a separate layer. If you want verifiable data, you still need explicit mechanisms such as cryptree structures, versioning, snapshots, mirrors, etc. Discovery does not replace integrity, it enables it.
If the complaint is: I trusted a third-party proxy account and now they are censoring or exploiting it, this gives you a way to set the record straight. You can publish canonical endpoints and authentic data. It does not and cannot prevent bad actors from continuing to impersonate you. Protocols cannot stop attempts at impersonation, they can only make authentic identity cryptographically distinguishable.
If the complaint is: impersonators exist, there is no digital way to prevent someone from copying your public data. The enforceable boundary is signature verification and canonical resolution. If an app refuses to verify, that is an application design choice, not a protocol limitation.
If the complaint is: I want trustless bridging inside legacy apps, then those apps must adopt identity resolution and verification models like this, or accept the tradeoffs of custodial bridges.
Not your key, not your account.

2026-02-18 15:53:47 CET

If you watch this you will find that some people think I said some interesting things and that I wear interesting clothing
https://rumble.com/v75u0om-why-using-bitcoin-matters-real-world-use-cases-plan-forum.html

2026-02-11 13:09:53 CET

Join us for a public Pubky Dev Call -- TODAY!
We’ll walk through recent updates, roadmap updates, and hear directly from the community.
- Pubky overview
- Pubky SDK walkthrough
- Events demo
- Homeserver Dashboard demo
- Q1/Q2 Roadmap
- Q&A
Google Meet:
https://meet.google.com/qfp-dihh-gbi
X stream:
https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1zqJVdjrWMlKB
Starts in 5 hours from this post!
https://blossom.primal.net/053e05d70fa838332b5866c86a33dcf22acee0cda38a5773bbda2b7d619d2c0f.png

2026-02-10 14:49:50 CET

- reply

you should cry harder on pubky instead

2026-02-10 14:14:13 CET

- reply

You can say anything you want about Nostr!
It's okay for people to appreciate Nostr; it's cool in its own way, and has its own history and community.
But if I'm gonna spend money on building something, it is, and always was, (since before nostr existed), something else: the atomic economy.
I'm a man on a mission, and I have no loyalties to inferior technologies!

2026-02-05 15:59:21 CET

- reply

Okay, now tell me about Mainline DHT and Pubky's protocol and how it fits in and why.

2026-02-04 22:12:24 CET

Finding things in Pubky gets easier and easier the more people use it.

2026-02-03 12:31:11 CET

- reply

Pubky is now open!
Pubky SDK is ready to build with!
Pubky Ring let's you keep your keys cold!
https://pubky.app
https://medium.com/pubky/opening-pubky-4bdca7dc4c77
https://pubky.org

2026-02-03 12:03:31 CET

- reply

We dont test in niche browsers, but it should work fine in chrome or webkit - do you have something important disabled locally?

2026-02-03 10:12:32 CET

Pubky is literally a permissionless protocol. This image represents our free hosting service.
Nostr users have blinders on to anything competitive, when they should be supportive and looking for people to team up with.
I have 13 years of history in these communities; never scamming, never lying, always trying to help and build open source stuff.
Why assume anything nefarious from me, ever? It is weird and makes things very awkward when you say incorrect things and FUD our work.
It makes no sense and makes nostr look like a pile of tribal cowards. Why would anyone want to be that?
Nostr is not Bitcoin, you dont have to pretend "maximalism" makes sense.
#nevent1q…mrn8

2026-02-03 02:24:14 CET

- reply

You are confusing offline signing with online authentication.
Amber signs Nostr events locally because Nostr requires signing every event. Pubky does not. Pubky establishes revocable sessions so apps can authenticate without repeatedly touching the identity key. Ring needs network access to complete the login handshake, not to export keys or sign content.
You make a key, you sign in to a homeserver, you take the key offline, you are done.
No more keys needed until you want to sign in to another server or app.
You only need to be online to auth or update your server location. Otherwise the key is mostly not used.
Pubky allows actual cold keys that only need to be warmed if you move servers or add more apps. You can keep Ring offline 90% of the time.

2026-02-01 20:31:46 CET

- reply

Join us on Pubky!
Pubky SDK is ready to build with!
Pubky Ring let's you keep your keys cold!
https://pubky.app
https://medium.com/pubky/opening-pubky-4bdca7dc4c77
https://pubky.org

2025-11-12 07:24:21 CET

- reply

Do you mean you need a new Pubky invite?

2025-11-11 23:49:07 CET

- reply

Sir, I wrote BIP177.
My opinion is fully specified!

2025-11-11 13:01:33 CET

- reply

MADMAN

2025-11-04 07:58:55 CET

Top is in.

2025-11-03 16:54:18 CET

- reply

Miners dont need to pool at all.

2025-11-03 16:36:53 CET

- reply

No, that isn't the problem...

2025-11-03 16:06:49 CET

- reply

No. It is simple because any design that implies trust in miners must accept that also means trust in government, and trust that nothing would convince them to rug pull.
This is a horrible assumption.

2025-11-03 15:28:33 CET

- reply

You could just ask the miner to run a mint for you and get a better UX.

2025-11-02 15:33:10 CET

- reply

If you trust miners you dont need drivechains. Just tell them not to replace your txn and include it someday when they can. And also accept that as settlement when people pay you. Zero-conf txns solve your needs.

2025-11-01 17:55:31 CET

The birth of Lightspark, led by David Marcus, was the top indicator for LN.
He is like a vulture that arrives to pick the bones of a trend 2 years too late.

2025-11-01 17:53:04 CET

- reply

It is all the same shit rearranged. Nothing can anchor to bitcoin without trust.

2025-11-01 16:48:31 CET

Drivechains are a trainwreck.
https://pubky.app/post/gujx6qd8ksydh1makdphd3bxu351d9b8waqka8hfg6q7hnqkxexo/003452JMEVW7G

2025-10-29 04:50:25 CET

https://youtu.be/EhJoJPf76Pw

2025-10-27 23:38:12 CET

Has anyone asked @npub1tlk…8097 what he thinks of "BIP444" and the overall "anti-spam" actions & narratives of the Ocean Mining team he is funding?

2025-10-24 21:37:19 CEST

I am very principled, even when it comes to personal relationships.
I intend to judge you. I must. You do it to me too.
When it comes arguing, I expect you to argue "like a man."
That means sincerely, honestly, with as much effort to seek the truth as possible.
Even if you think I am rude or disparaging your pet project, you have an obligation to separate style from substance and provide genuine counterarguments.
I am not interested in humoring your equivocations, self-deceit, and insecurities. It is already hard enough to focus on discovering the truth while fighting off my own!
I have a lot of confidence in the arguments I make because they are the result of such high standards, not because I am arrogant, not because I smart, but because I was there to see when all the other ideas failed by comparison, because I am stubborn, because I dont want to embarrass myself to myself.
I cannot care what you think about me if you are preoccupied with my style. If we are talking about me in the argument, it isnt really on topic, is it?
If you want to refute me, do it well. Don't be lazy. Don't lie or complain. If you feel insulted by my sincere and rationalized arguments, the way to "insult" me back is to prove me wrong.
I say all this because I want to make the world a better place ... for REAL ... Not some fake temporary version where people get to be superficially proud and scam people for a while.
If you dismiss function for form, you cannot make real discoveries, just temporary hype cycles that fade away.

2025-10-19 13:36:08 CEST

- reply

RAID Shadow Legends

2025-10-19 11:27:15 CEST

I ran Knots before it was uncool.

2025-10-19 05:59:14 CEST

- reply

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPl4ngNy_cl-LGQ9oPdrNXItjCv42ISLX

2025-10-15 07:43:31 CEST

- reply

looking forward to being invited onto his podcast to talk about Pubky

2025-10-11 09:32:50 CEST

I keep telling you guys we need to fire Saylor.
We need a new Pumpmaster.
Buying stocks instead of real BTC doesn't work!

2025-10-05 15:56:20 CEST

- reply

Yes it is the best discovery, but PKARR is still part of Pubky, whether you use the other aspects or not :)
Pubky = PKARR identities + servers + indexers using an open semantic social graph
Otherwise, Iroh is very cool, but make sure you are okay with their relay tradeoffs. It operates with a CPOF by default.

2025-10-05 15:38:31 CEST

- reply

Well, "just a discovery mechanism" is a bit of an understatement!
PKDNS uses literally the oldest, most decentralized, and thus, most censorship resistant form discovery on the planet. This is in contrast to Nostr which assumes a centralized trusted source, or Bluesky which explicitly provides a centralized trusted source.

2025-10-05 10:34:06 CEST

- reply

Simply, a DHT is a way of distributing a lot of unique data across many nodes, while remaining very fast. Pubky uses Mainline DHT as a place to store our own version of DNS records, called PKARR (public-key-addressable resource records), or, more broadly, PKDNS.
How Pubky uses Mainline DHT for its PKDNS system:
https://medium.com/pubky/public-key-domains-censorship-resistance-explained-33d0333e6123
All about Mainline's censorship resistance:
https://medium.com/pubky/mainline-dht-censorship-explained-b62763db39cb
Great video about Kademlia, the DHT technology that Mainline uses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QdKhNpsj8M

2025-10-03 13:32:22 CEST

- reply

All transactions are spam to someone.

2025-10-03 12:31:29 CEST

- reply

I havent read or watched any of Core's takes really. I just listened to her words and used my fucking brain.

2025-10-02 11:40:25 CEST

Nick Szabo, here, is demonstrating, and recommending, handwaving as a security strategy.
He conflates a metaphor people can "understand" (locked doors) to support the idea of censoring specific bitcoin transactions at the mempool level.
But filters aren't locks. They aren't even doors. They are fences in an open field. They don't prevent trespassers, they increase people walking on the grass.
We already know how to censor bitcoin txns we don't like, because we already do it successfully! Miners know there are certain poisonous, yet valid, transactions. Through meatspace, they enforce exclusion of such txns.
Sadly, this whole "spam" "war" requires Bitcoiners to take a ride together that ends up supporting the idea of miners being heavily regulated by governments, and the idea that we must be good at censoring txns we do not like.
Because, unlike pleb nodes, it is miners that decide what gets into Bitcoin. No one else.
Arguing policy is pointless, just make the config you like and convince miners to run it...
...But if you do, know that you are doing evil, and acting as useful idiots for the state.
https://blossom.primal.net/79577a02d241731e6d8d6a8554f920dcc3c0b9f30edf414b457a8af9a02b547e.png
https://blossom.primal.net/489f8d9966f132760f0c053b974e0c510dd25f88f22d4963618da2bab215d008.png

2025-10-02 10:45:41 CEST

- reply

Shouldn't you be blaming the miners for including the txns you don't like?
Or, shouldn't you be providing an actual solution that prevents txns you don't like from being possible inside of bitcoin blocks?
Arguing policy is pointless, just make the config you like and convince miners to run it.

2025-10-01 09:27:24 CEST

- reply

She didn't say anything bad. The idea is that ALL transactions can be subjectively judged, and there will always be txns people don't like. We have NO WAY to know how people are using txns, or even how they value those txns. All txns are "NFTs" and none are explicitly more "money" than the others.
This orients the conversation correctly, away from policy discussion, toward protocol discussion, forcing opponents to properly propose REAL solutions for data on Bitcoin, instead of handwaving policy drama that fixes nothing.
Currently, this is mostly a culture war over default settings in an app.

2025-10-01 09:16:26 CEST

- reply

Seems like the invite codes are working great as an idiot filter in this early stage!

2025-09-29 17:48:01 CEST

Pubky homeserver file explorer:
https://explorer.pubky.app/

2025-09-27 08:32:55 CEST

- reply

Eric says to me "Anyone who is serious about sponsoring a Libbitcoin dev is free to contact me or them."
So, I think whatever prior effort you made was the wrong angle or through the wrong contacts.

2025-09-26 13:43:44 CEST

- reply

I more meant funding the libbitcoin project than him specifically, but maybe that is what you meant too?
He refused funding to do something like create a funding org or grants for libbitcoin devs?

2025-09-24 10:01:20 CEST

- reply

Nostr devs have less than zero interest in other solutions, even if they are strictly better.
For a cult, being loyal is more important than progress.
Note that his question could have been "What are some other interesting protocols that Nostr can learn from? What's new and cool out there?"

2025-08-30 10:29:57 CEST

Matt Odell is a coward and a liar.
We interacted on Nostr about Pubky differences a month ago, and I've done interviews with him in the past, but he refuses to have me on his show again.
Why?
Now that he is aligned with Primal, a Nostr app, and has seen some of my arguments, and Pubky tech, he seems to be scared and unwilling to have a candid conversation with me about comparing Pubky to Nostr.
He claims to support freedom tech, even if it is better than Nostr, so what is the problem?
So, @nprofile…zx3h you get the #coward badge until this changes!
https://blossom.primal.net/f34a6204e3f555d198e6c430dae148523e14f806d71902fc49c28edd5b96a415.png

2025-07-12 10:45:33 CEST

GM nostr!
https://blossom.primal.net/9b5fe54c011b707ef8b4d607c54cb9a7a0c23beb9fd2443a27d7b2fb1fc04c92.png
https://blossom.primal.net/f8cebd6a2b4021ccc8e409259156567cb1146856b4f746330e2b763f9833eeea.png
https://blossom.primal.net/7cbe5b1730f29521df2edcb105477e05509269bfc7c55eb522d8c8f5b68ac60c.png
https://blossom.primal.net/443bde78a1767e769ca4741a9aeb2a1ed35175f1787bb4ab799b145c09c8e9c1.png

2025-07-12 05:28:13 CEST

- reply

Someday, people will stop trying to strap bullshit onto Bitcoin.

2025-07-10 16:35:36 CEST

- reply

Why is there no money here?
I thought zaps and valueforvalue were the mission?