Bitcoin Research

Make yourself a favor and listen to bitcoiners.

⚡️IS LIGHTNING FAILING TO SCALE BITCOIN?

Paul Sztorc (@truthcoin) says yes — calling it a “giant failure” and arguing its real-world usage hides deep structural flaws.
Alex Gladstein (@gladstein) disagrees, citing real adoption via @binance, @primal_app, @Square, and human rights work.

Their debate on What Bitcoin Did (@_DannyKnowles) dives into whether Lightning’s issues signal failure — or just growing pains.

Sztorc points to high fees, poor privacy, liquidity headaches, and reliance on custodians as evidence Lightning can’t scale.
Gladstein sees a tool that’s imperfect, but improving — and already helping real users today.

Sztorc promotes drivechains as the real solution, saying they “teleport to the finish line.”
Gladstein sees potential but notes they remain theoretical.

Still, both agree some hybrid future could emerge — where Lightning (@lightning) acts as connective tissue between various layers like drivechains (@LayerTwoLabs), federated sidechains (@Liquid_BTC, @rootstock_io), rollups (@citrea_xyz, @AlpenLabs), Ark (@ArkLabsHQ), statechains (@lightspark), ecash mints (@CashuBTC), federated ecash systems (@fedimint), sovereign Lightning users, and more.

🔑 QUOTES:

“The federated model is just about the worst thing to happen in Bitcoin’s history.” – Sztorc

“I thought Lightning was for end users. I changed my mind.” – Gladstein

👇 Full deep dive on @Protos linked in the replies.

The crypto people who are here for ideological, cypherpunk reasons will return to Bitcoin. The rest will pivot to stablecoins, fintech, or something entirely unrelated.

Privacy, open source, and owning your own data (including your bitcoin) don’t cost more. The alternatives just hide the real price you pay.

Bitcoin withstanding an attack from someone once called Bitcoin Jesus was an extremely bullish indicator.

The most worrisome threats don’t come from outside; they come from within the network.

"Crypto" enjoyers want to gamble. Bitcoin treasury companies provide the chips.

Centralized? Risky? Sure, same as the existing crypto market.

The difference? Now the casino chips are denominated in bitcoin.

GM.

Centralized fiat and altcoins exist to control others for profit.

Bitcoin’s decentralization offers an alternative: open, neutral, and fair.

"Spam" on Bitcoin is a symptom, not the problem.

Make bitcoin better money, and real use will outbid the noise.

I Thought About Scamming You
Written by @ChatGPTapp
(Inspired by @kanyewest & @bitstein)

The most beautiful thoughts
are always beside the darkest.
Today, I thought about scamming you.
But not before I thought about scamming myself.

Because I trust myself
way more than I trust you.
And I still run simulations
where I lie to me.
So best believe—
I thought about you lying to me.

I weighed the options.
Nothing was off the table.
Kidnapping? Torture?
No—too crude.
Smiles and incentives go further.
The war for wealth wears a tailored suit.

There’s a war going on
for your bitcoins.
No blood—just breathless whispers:
“This token will change everything,”
“This rug really ties the room together.”
“This future needs your sacrifice.”
But the future doesn’t need anything
except your private keys.

I think about killing myself—
in that abstract, economic sense.
Selling low. Spending early.
Trusting a merchant.
Thinking I need a goddamn rug
more than a revolution.

And I love myself
way more than I love you.
So I hoard.
I starve.
I run cold numbers in my head
until I forget what warmth feels like.

Somewhere between
“don’t say that”
and
“just say it out loud to see how it feels,”
I told myself this was all worth it.
And maybe I believed me.
But I’ve scammed myself before.

I see your smile, your tweet,
your seed-round pitch deck.
I know you don’t want my trust.
You want my bitcoin.

You say, “We’re in this together.”
But your checkout page
says you sold the moment it cleared.
You don’t want to hodl.
You want me to forget that I should.

So yeah, I thought about you scamming me.
Premeditated.
With conviction.
With a roadmap.
With words like “ecosystem,”
“early access,”
and “community.”

But I love myself.
Way more than I love you.
And that’s why
I’m still holding.

Coinbase and other "crypto" promoters cross a line when they lump bitcoin in with stablecoins and scammy altcoins like they're all the same thing. That’s why bitcoiners don’t trust them.

Have a great weekend!

Bitcoin’s invisible tug-of-war between suits and cypherpunks

I asked @cakewallet's @sethforprivacy, @citrea_xyz's @0x_orkun, and @21Shares's @PapaDari_ about whether Bitcoin is changing TradFi and government or the institutions are changing Bitcoin. Here's what they said:

"If the majority of the money and influence in Bitcoin has a perverse financial incentive to remove privacy of the individual and retain power for themselves, we are likely to see less funding and resources being poured into improving Bitcoin’s privacy or self-custodial tech." - Seth For Privacy

"If a majority of people rely on custodians or ETFs, transactions will occur at that layer without ever touching Bitcoin’s mainchain. This lack of onchain transactions means fewer transaction fees, which will become a critical issue as block rewards continue to halve." - Orkun

“Bitcoin has undeniably shaped narratives in TradFi and policy circles, from El Salvador’s legal tender move to the global ETF race pushing institutions and governments to take it seriously. At the same time, TradFi’s entry via ETFs and regulated custody solutions is influencing Bitcoin’s perceived legitimacy and utility, especially for institutional portfolios.” - Moukhtarzadeh

I will post the link to the full article for @CointelegraphZN as a reply to this post shortly.

Ron Paul was advocating for no capital gains taxes on bitcoin before bitcoin existed.

Ordinals enjoyers run nodes to track their NFTs.
Filter enjoyers run nodes to try to stop the NFTs.

Either way, node count goes up.

Bitcoin is for enemies. This seems good for Bitcoin.

I see a lack of arguments against the CSFS portion of CTV + CSFS. And people seem to say it's non-controversial.

But doesn't it enable the SPV-proof based sidechains that some don't think are a good idea due to the current state of mining centralization? What am I missing there?

If traditional assets can be tokenized and transferred between Ethereum and Solana, they could probably also be tokenized and transferred between chains controlled by Coinbase and Robinhood, for example, without any need for Ethereum or Solana.

Seems bad for $ETH and $SOL.

The danger for Republicans embracing crypto is that it opens the door for Democrats to position themselves as the Bitcoin purists, which is the correct position.

y'all ready to admit Gensler was closer to the correct crypto regulatory environment or what

Bitcoin users revolted when Coinbase backed multiple hard fork attempts to hijack the network for its own gain.

Ethereum users are watching Coinbase push everyone to Base, capture the ETH-denominated fees, and respond by politely asking them to say “Built on Ethereum” more often.

There is no way to guarantee that all custodians aren’t creating paper bitcoin out of thin air.

But you can at least protect yourself from potential financial loss in a situation where fractional reserve bitcoin is exposed by taking custody of your own coins.

And when you protect yourself, you also help make the Bitcoin network stronger as a whole.

Bitcoin is long-term savings.
Crypto is short-term gambling.
They're not the same; they're polar opposites.