>it's ridiculous people are now arguing we CAN have trusted ...

Ryu Santiago

npub1ftj3tmr44tdzs93e0hdgfnrrct9pu2e8haylzuatm2tkfwdaudds27pjju

hex

a34ad7d4755b992b09f4e6832cb2748cad6d72fb52c97490e479b05ed9a0dde4

nevent

nevent1qqs2xjkh6364hxftp86wdqevkf6gettdwta49jt5jrj8nvz7mxsdmeqprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgsy4eg4a3664k3gzcuhmk5ye33u9js79vnm7j03ww4a49myhx77xkc6u4z37

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-02-11T18:33:32Z

↳ Reply to Event not found

7cf9eb02a4db5aa341436851480e585b8fa20b3bd25cb346df760654aab200be...

it's ridiculous people are now arguing we CAN have trusted banks for scaling with custodial ecash, but we CAN'T have SPV nodes for light wallets and good UX for self-custody L1 transactions.

My only minor dispute with this framing is that the "Bitcoin bank" talk never went away, since Hal Finney was talking about that concept as early as 2010-11; the obvious concession to that counter would be that he was talking about it from a transitional point of view, with a traditional bank adopting and then gradually replacing their financial backing with a (at that point in time) better money. I'd also speculate that he was speaking from a far more optimistic lens on eventual efforts like Xapo Bank and the dozens of on/off-ramps that exist today, when we know where we are a decade and a half later on those fronts, with primary usage of them being existentially necessary but not preferred to the users of those services (I'm in that camp).

The rhetorical framework was adapted, sure, but the talking points never changed; in turn, that serves to highlight how fucking delusional the EBSC hypemen are with their continued prophetization of an overtly compromised currency and its backing members.

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "a34ad7d4755b992b09f4e6832cb2748cad6d72fb52c97490e479b05ed9a0dde4",
  "pubkey": "4ae515ec75aada2816397dda84cc63c2ca1e2b27bf49f173abda9764b9bde35b",
  "created_at": 1770834812,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "7cf9eb02a4db5aa341436851480e585b8fa20b3bd25cb346df760654aab200be",
      "wss://nostr.wine/",
      "root",
      "f985d309197c805e1719c73185b574fc3ee407d7c1b6157dee99c6ace2599bbb"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "f985d309197c805e1719c73185b574fc3ee407d7c1b6157dee99c6ace2599bbb"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "\u003eit's ridiculous people are now arguing we CAN have trusted banks for scaling with custodial ecash, but we CAN'T have SPV nodes for light wallets and good UX for self-custody L1 transactions.\n\nMy only minor dispute with this framing is that the \"Bitcoin bank\" talk never went away, since Hal Finney was talking about that concept as early as 2010-11; the obvious concession to that counter would be that he was talking about it from a transitional point of view, with a traditional bank adopting and then gradually replacing their financial backing with a (at that point in time) better money. I'd also speculate that he was speaking from a far more optimistic lens on eventual efforts like Xapo Bank and the dozens of on/off-ramps that exist today, when we know where we are a decade and a half later on those fronts, with primary usage of them being existentially necessary but not preferred to the users of those services (I'm in that camp).\n\nThe rhetorical framework was adapted, sure, but the talking points never changed; in turn, that serves to highlight how fucking delusional the EBSC hypemen are with their continued prophetization of an overtly compromised currency and its backing members.",
  "sig": "4c161f39097add57507e43cd3934a956c6253d1af10079065feb96c634ba474499e4123a1bf62db77fe9dc420f4d852cf021289e86e3f3b552955015244e3994"
}