Share on social media:

Episode 1178 of Bitcoin And . . . is LIVE!

Topics for today:

• Knots Vs. Core Brings Szabo Back
• Plan B Launches CypherTank in Lugano
• Stablecoin use increases 320% in Q3
• Bitchat Download Frenzy in Madagascar

Today's Articles:

https://x.com/callebtc/status/1972275437821722935


https://atlas21.com/bitcoin-core-v30-incoming-nick-szabo-breaks-silence-after-five-years/


https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/plan-b-network-launches-850k-bitcoin-pitch-contest-cyphertank-taps-tether-and-blockstream-chiefs-as-judges


https://cointelegraph.com/news/stablecoins-45b-net-inflows-q3-2025


https://cointelegraph.com/news/poland-parliament-passes-crypto-bill-criticism


https://decrypt.co/341929/strategy-third-smallest-bitcoin-purchase-2025-dividend-payments


https://atlas21.com/madagascar-bitchat-downloads-surge-amid-protests-over-water-and-energy/


https://www.coindesk.com/business/2025/09/29/swift-to-develop-blockchain-based-ledger-for-24-7-cross-border-payments


https://bitcoinnews.com/markets/vanguard-bitcoin-etf-3rd-party/


Get You're Free Comfrey Owner's Manual Here:
https://www.bitcoinandshow.com/the-comfrey-owners-manual-is-here/

Find the Bitcoin And Podcast on every podcast app here:
https://episodes.fm/1438789088

Find me on nostr
npub1vwymuey3u7mf860ndrkw3r7dz30s0srg6tqmhtjzg7umtm6rn5eq2qzugd (npub)
6389be6491e7b693e9f368ece88fcd145f07c068d2c1bbae4247b9b5ef439d32 (Hex)

Twitter:
https://twitter.com/DavidB84567

StackerNews:
stacker.news/NunyaBidness

Podcasting 2.0:
fountain.fm/show/eK5XaSb3UaLRavU3lYrI

Apple Podcasts:
tinyurl.com/unm35bjh

Mastodon:
https://noauthority.social/@NunyaBidness

Support Bitcoin And . . . on Patreon:
patreon.com/BitcoinAndPodcast

Find Lightning Network Channel partners here:
https://t.me/+bj-7w_ePsANlOGEx (Nodestrich)
https://t.me/plebnet (Plebnet)

Music by:
Flutey Funk Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

[00:00:02] David Bennett:

It is 09:55AM   Pacific Daylight Time. It is the September   2025,   and this is episode eleven seventy eight of Bitcoin. And it's all the news you can use about Bitcoin and more. That's why you're here, and we're gonna start the day off with a post   from Cali BTC.   He's one of the guys behind Cashew. He, is a contributor to BitChat. He's the one that   did the Android stuff.   He's Cali is he's got some good things to say about.   Well this this whole nonsense   behind knots versus core.   It's   this has gotten   out   of control, people.   This is out of control.  

Everybody is ready to rip everybody else's head off. And my question,   as always, is this.   Why do we follow the same pattern?   What why is it   that when Bitcoin really starts to rip,   and we get around all time highs,   we end up   destroying ourselves   with the infighting.   And I'm not gonna say any more about that crap   because no one's gonna listen to me. But it is almost like freaking clockwork.   2017,   we start ramping up. We start going, like,   uber parabolic, and what happens?   Roger Ver decides he wants to fork Bitcoin because   reasons.  

And then the New York agreement happens because reasons.   And then everybody wants to control Bitcoin because   reasons. And we get a blow off top.   And now the same thing is happening here. We're at all   time highs,   we're steady   above a 100,000.   And what happens?   We get the heaviest hitters in the Bitcoin space   duking it out over   spam   or supposed spam   as if that's the most important thing right now. It's it's not. But   we've got   Nick Szabo is also going to weigh in on the knots versus core issue. It's not just gonna be just Cali. And if you don't know who Nick Szabo is, he sort of backed he backed off   of developing for Bitcoin Core a cup I wanna say a couple of years ago, and we haven't heard a word out of Nick Szabo   since   until today.  

Until today, he's he's back. But that's not gonna be all we talk about. There is other news out there. Plan b network.   Well, they've launched the Bitcoin pitch contest you might be interested in. We got a report on how   USDT and USDC stable coins are doing, and it's rather surprising, honestly.   Poland has done pissed off   everybody in the space because, well, they've got a bill that they wanna push through, and it seems   seems like it's gonna happen, and it's just pretty nasty.   Strategy,   well, they they   they bought more Bitcoin, not a lot, but there's some other things about this particular buy that I find interesting.   And BitChat,   speaking of Cali,   BitChat is back in the news today because, well,   another country is up in arms about   something.  

And then we have Swift.   Ah, yes.   The inter banking   payment thing that we if you're like, if if you make a transfer from one bank to another, you're using SWIFT.   Even if you don't necessarily   use SWIFT yourself, the banks are.   And they want,   instead of just using Bitcoin,   no. No. No. They wanna build their very own blockchain.   We'll get into it, and Vanguard   bends the freaking knee.   Now remember,   Vanguard   staunchly   said   on day one of the release of the Bitcoin ETFs   that they were never gonna offer Bitcoin or any Bitcoin products   to their customers because they didn't believe in it. Well,   times change.  

Let's let's talk about this Cali post, which is, yes, it's it's on x, but   I'm sure it's probably found on Nostr as well. But   let's just look at this.   This is his post.   And he says,   this is a long post that hopefully bridges some gaps between technical people, like developers, and non technical users and how they look at spam prevention in Bitcoin. I hope that it clarifies why I think   that there is such a huge misunderstanding   between both camps.   I'll preface this post with first disqualifying   any malicious attempts to misrepresent the motives of either camp.   Everybody wants to improve Bitcoin as money. Money is Bitcoin's use case.  

It's not a data storage system.   If you think otherwise, there are countless shitcoins you can play with.   Let's get into   it. I have worked on anonymous systems for over a decade.   I have read tons of research on spam detection,   rate limiting, and I have implemented spam prevention techniques in the real world. I am very confident   to say that there is not a single known method to prevent spam in decentralized,   anonymous, open networks   other than   proof of work.   This is what Satoshi realized when he designed Bitcoin, and it's why only transaction   fees   can reliably   fight spam without sacrificing   any of Bitcoin's properties.  

Let me explain.   Spam prevention is a cat and mouse game. As a systems architect, your goal is to make the life of a spammer harder. You increase the friction.   This is why on the web you see CAPTCHAs,   sign ups, or anything that can artificially slow you down. Slowing down is key.   This is why Satoshi   turned to proof of work.   Let's contrast this to other methods of spam prevention.   This is not an exhaustive list, but it illustrates the design space of this problem.   Other methods are often derivatives of these.   CAPTCHAs.  

CAPTCHAs are a centralized form of work or proof of work for humans.   Google servers   give you a hard to solve task, like select all the bicycles,   that will slow you down that you can't bombard a website with millions of requests.   It requires   centralization.   You need to prove to Google that you're human so that you can use another website.   If you could host your own captcha service, why would anyone believe you're not cheating?   Logins.   Logins with email and passwords are most pop the most popular way to slow down users. Before you can sign up, you need to get an email address. And to get an email address, you often need a phone number today.   The purpose of this, again,   is to slow you down   and to track you, to be honest. It only works well when emails are hard to get, like in a centralized web where Google controls how hard it is to get an email account. If you could easily use your own email server,   why would any bully anyone believe you're not a bot?  

The next one is the most relevant to Bitcoin   Adblock Filters   These are another form of spam prevention but this time the roles are reversed   You as a user fight against the spam from websites and advertising companies trying to invade your brain. Ad blocking works only under certain conditions.   First, you need to be able to spell out what the spam looks like. Like, yeah, what the filter should filter out. Second,   you need to update your filters every time someone circumvents them. Have you ever installed a YouTube ad ad blocker and then noticed that it stops working after a few weeks?   That's because you're playing cat and mouse with YouTube.  

You block, they circumvent, you update your filters, rinse and repeat.   The fact that you need to update your filters is critical and that's where it ties back to Bitcoin.   Suppose you have a mempool filter for transactions with a lock time of 21   because some stupid NFT project   uses that.   You maybe slow them down for a few weeks but then they notice it and change their lock time to 22.   You're back at zero. The spam filter doesn't work anymore.   What do you   do? You update your filter. But where do you get your new filter from?   You need a governing body or some centralized entity that keeps updating these filters   and you need to download their new rules every single day. That's what ad blockers in your web browser do. They trust a centralized authority to know what's best for you and blindly accept their new filters every single day.  

I hope you see the issue here.   Nobody should even consider this idea of constantly updating filter rules for Bitcoin.   This would give the filter providers a concerning level of power and trust. It would turn bitcoin into a centrally planned system, the opposite of what makes bitcoin special.   This is why filters do not work for decentralized   anonymous systems.   They require a central authority.   Until   now, these rules were determined by Bitcoin Core, but they have realized that these rules do not work anymore.   Transactions bypassed the filters and at some point carrying them around became a burden to the node runners themselves.  

Imagine you're using an outdated ad blocker, but instead of filtering out ads, it now also filters out legitimate content   you might be interested in.   That's what mempool filters do, And that's why Bitcoin Core is slowly relaxing these filters.   This has been discussed for over two years.   It is not a sudden decision.   The goal of this change is not to help transactions to slip through more easily.   The goal is to improve your node's prediction of what is going to be in the next block.   Most people misrepresent this part. They say, quote, it's to turn Bitcoin into a shitcoin.   But that is just a false statement at best or a manipulation tactic at worst.  

Let's tie it back to proof of work and why fees are the actual filter that keeps Bitcoin secure and prevents spam reasonably well.   Satoshi realized that there is no technique that could slow down block production and prevent denial of service attacks in a decentralized system   other than proof of work.   Fees prevent you from filling blocks with an infinite number of transactions.   All the other options would introduce some form of trust or open the door for censorship.   Nothing works   other than proof of work.   He was smart enough to design a system where the proof of work that goes into block production is minted into the monetary unit of the system itself.  

You spend energy, you get sats.   This slows down block production.   How do you slow down transactions within those blocks?   You spend the sats themselves.   Original earned from block production   as fees for the transaction within the block itself.   This idea is truly genius and it's the only reason why Bitcoin can exist.   All other attempts   of creating decentralized money have failed to solve this step. Think about it. Without knowing who you are, whether you're one person pretending to be a thousand or a thousand people pretending to be one,   Bitcoin defends itself and anyone who runs nodes in the Bitcoin system from spam   by making you pay for your activity.  

People sometimes counter this by saying the economic demand for decentralized data storage is higher than the monetary use case.   First of all, I think that's just wrong.   There are way cheaper ways to store data. We have shit coins for this. And the value of having decentralized   neutral Internet money is beyond comparison. However,   there is a much deeper concern here.   If you truly believe this, I ask you,   what is Bitcoin worth to you?   If you think Bitcoin can't succeed as money, you know, be competitive,   why do you even care?  

If you're not willing to pay fees for the use case that we all believe Bitcoin is designed for, money,   and you believe that no one is willing to pay for it, how can it even persist into the future?   You can't have it all. If Bitcoin is money, which I believe it is, then we need to pay the price to keep it alive.   There is no free lunch.   Either we centralize   or we pay the price of decentralization.   I know where I stand.   Peace. Okay. So that's Cali's post.   And whether or not you agree with Cali is is not the point.   I like the way that he's going about it. It's just a a level headed argument. He's not calling anybody names. He's not doing and he's not pulling that that weird   crap that we always do in politics   where the the knots people   are being called Nazis.  

It's   childish   beyond   anything. I mean, I thought it was childish back in 2017.   This   this is just   calling people Nazis because they're running knots   is stupid. And there's some of that. There's some   name for the core people, and it's just as bad. And I can't remember what it is. And it doesn't matter.   We're   tearing each other apart, and it doesn't need to happen.   This is not that big of a deal.   If you don't wanna run   version 30 of Bitcoin Core, then don't   run version 29.   Or if you want to have your mempool   capable of of being able to see and react to sub one Satoshi fees, then by all means, upgrade to 29.1.   Right now,   I'm still on 28 something.  

I have   I have never felt compelled   to immediately up excuse me, upgrade   any of my Bitcoin core versions. And, yes, I run Bitcoin core.   I'm not going to run 30. Not until these people   somehow or another get their collected shit together   and I don't know come to some kind of agreement or or come to some stop or at least stop treating each other like the fucking enemy.   You want to destroy Bitcoin?   Sometimes people say oh well apathy will destroy bitcoin you know what else can destroy bitcoin   infighting   at the highest levels of people who know how to actually build the system   that that can really screw this up   The filters, whether there's filters on or filters off, dude, that's your choice. If you want filters,   then you run 29.  

Or if you want to run 30 and still run filters,   you go into the config file and then you change everything back.   This is this entire argument is completely unnecessary.   But let's see what Nick Szabo has to say about this. Atlas 21,   Bitcoin Core version 30 incoming,   Nick Szabo breaks silence after five years. Oh, five years it's been. Holy shit.   Bitcoin Core developers have released the second test version of the Bitcoin Core version 30 upgrade.   On September 28, the Bitcoin Core Project x account announced the availability of a new release candidate   for testing, calling it a new major release.  

The upgrade   gradually removes the old legacy wallet infrastructure   and introduces a simplified command system, but the main controversies concern changes to the policies related to the opreturn   opcode,   which allows arbitrary data to be embedded in transactions.   The expansion of data limits removes the default cap of 80 bytes,   raising it to a virtually unlimited level, up to nearly four megabytes per transaction output.   Some users argue that the network should be used exclusively for financial transactions,   not for data storage.  

According to them, extensive use of op return would permanently bloat the blockchain   since every full node   must retain the data,   increasing   operational cost. Furthermore, the network could be flooded with spam and malware.   Another part of the community argues that if users pay the fees, they should be able to use block space as they wish, while market forces will naturally limit malicious uses through transaction fees.   The upgrade to version 30 is expected by the October,   although the precise date remains flexible due to ongoing testing and developer debates.   And here we come to Nick Szabo.  

On September 28, Cypherpunk   pioneer Nick Szabo returned to X after nearly five years of absence,   joining the debate.   He stated that network fees   described by developer, Cali,   as the spam filter   protect minors but do not provide   sufficient   disincentive to protect full nodes.   Zabo says, quote,   fees protect the minors, but they don't provide enough disincentive   to protect the full nodes.   This has always been a problem, of course. But increasing   the opportune allowance   will likely make this problem worse.   It also will increase legal risks.   He further added, quote, it's an open legal issue almost everywhere, suggesting that nodes could be held legally liable for harmful data stored on the blockchain.  

A court case highlighted by attorney Joe   Carlessare,   I think is how you pronounce it, ruled that node operators are not liable   if they don't have knowledge or control of the data.   Zabo noted that one argument in favor of core is that data can be hidden in other ways, but op return data is pruneable.   Quote, this suggests that allowing more data on opportune conceivably   may reduce legal risks, Nick Szabo said.   However,   a counterargument   holds that illegal content in standard format, thus readily viewable by common software, quote, is more likely to impress lawyers,   judges, and jurors, and thus is legally more risky than data that has been broken up or hidden and thus require specialized software to reconstruct,   the cypherpunk   noted. And that, I guess, would be Nick Szabo.  

I I want to I want to read this sentence.   It is an open legal   issue almost everywhere suggesting   that nodes could be held legally liable for harmful data stored on the blockchain.   If you think Bitcoin nodes   are the only,   for lack of a better term,   servers   that contain   illicit material,   you are wrong.   AT and T data centers have illicit material on them. I guarantee it.   AWS   has illicit material on it, I guarantee it.   Google   servers have illicit material on it, I guarantee it.   Will the feds raid those facilities?   Or they   do you think they're really just gonna come knock on 20,000   doors in a 174   different countries around the world and say, I need to see your note?  

Really?   Really?   And then if we let that happen,   that's on us.   That would be on us, guys.   It's this entire   argument   is crap.   Alright.   But   the real damage isn't about, you know, illicit material on my node.   It's not about illicit material on your node.   It's about the infighting   between the knots guys and the core guys, and we've seen this before. Back in 2017,   it was the big blockers versus the small blockers.   And the small blockers won,   mostly. We did get a a block size increase, but but not not the way that the big blockers wanted. They, they were there were some people that were calling for, like, 16 megabyte blocks,   and most were calling for anywhere between four and eight megabyte blocks.  

But the small blockers did the   user activated software.   You ask if you ever see somebody like Sampson Moe wearing a hat that says you ask if that's where that hat is from. It's from the 2017 era.   We won.   We we we were like we were like, fork it. Go ahead. Fork it. And they did. The big blockers forked it, and it failed immediately   because there was an off by one error in the code that nobody caught. And if everybody had got along with it instead of fighting back, we would have been up a up shit creek.   So   but here we are again.  

Here we are again.   It's just it the the whole thing   is a waste of our time.   So let's talk about people who are trying to do other work that makes sense in the space. Plan b network launches an $850,000   Bitcoin pitch contest called Cipher Tank,   taps Tether and Blockstream chiefs as judges.   This is Vivek Sin out of Bitcoin magazine.   Plan b network and the plan b VC fund have unveiled Cipher Tank,   a Bitcoin focused pitch competition set to put take place in Lugano during the plan b forum.   The initiative, offering over $850,000   in total prizes,   aims to spotlight innovative Bitcoin projects and establish Lugano as a premier Bitcoin hub. The competition will feature 11 carefully selected projects,   eight for profit, and three nonprofit   competing across various categories,   including on chain Bitcoin technology,   lightning network applications, peer to peer innovations, and solutions for emerging markets.  

For profit winners will share a $450,000   pre authorized investment via a capped   SAFE or SAFE   from the plan b VC fund along with $200,000   in incubation and acceleration services   at the Lugano plan b hub.   Quote, Cypher Tank is designed to give Bitcoin founders not only capital, but a global stage said Giacomo Zuko, director of the plan b network. Quote, by recording real negotiations,   scoring pitches, and sharing episodes online,   we're amplifying innovation and drawing attention to Lugano as a Bitcoin hub, end quote.   The competition   has attracted an impressive panel of judges, including industry leaders such as Palo Ardoino from Tether,   Adam Back from Blockstream, Matt O'Dell from ten thirty one, Mike Harmuz from Lightning Ventures, and Preston Pish from Ego Death.  

These experts will evaluate projects across multiple rounds with semi finals scheduled for October 22 and finals on 10/27/2025.   Nonprofit   projects will compete in categories spanning human rights protection,   scientific breakthroughs,   and Lugano Bitcoin Citadel initiatives.   The winning nonprofits will share a $200,000   non dilutive grant from the plan b foundation   with potential additional grants from judges.   Cipher Tank is the first Bitcoin only pitch series that will film real founder investor negotiations,   combine them with judge panel scoring, and distribute the episodes globally.  

Episodes will be released across YouTube, Rumble, and x by the 2025.   Applications are now open for both for profit startups and nonprofit projects.   The initiative represents a significant step in Bitcoin's evolution,   offering not just funding, but also a platform for showcasing innovation in the Bitcoin space.   The competition structure, combining investment opportunities with global visibility,   positions it as a potential catalyst for the next wave of Bitcoin development and adoption.   For more information and applications,   interested founders can visit the official application   portal, and that is a link to the URL that goes to the official application portal, which is a Google Docs,   URL, by the way, just in in case you're interested.  

Again, as normal, all of the stories that I read to you today, the URL directly to that story will be in the show notes. If you want to go look at the official application portal, you just need to click on the URL for this particular story, which is about the plan b network launching the Bitcoin pitch contest.   I'm excited about this. This could actually turn into something really cool,   especially if the people that are doing the video,   if the video team   is really good with editing   and really have really good equipment,   good lighting, I mean, like, do it professionally.  

There's no reason that this couldn't be like a hit series on YouTube. Absolutely no reason in the world not for it to happen. Alright. USDT and USDC   dominate $46,000,000,000   in quarterly stablecoin inflows.   Ezra Rivera is gonna tell us about this from Cointelegraph.   Stablecoins   recorded more than 46,000,000,000   in net inflows in the last ninety days, highlighting   the rising demand   for United States dollar pegged assets in the crypto space.   On Monday, data tracker rwa.xyz   showed that Tether's USDT   stablecoin   led the quarter with 19,600,000,000.0   in net inflows,   followed by Circle with 12,300,000,000.0,   and Athena synthetic stablecoin, Athena USDE,   also stood out with 9,000,000,000.  

And then there are some other players like MakerDAO and and PayPal USD blah blah blah. But emerge oh, god. I'm not they they mentioned Ripple, and I'm just gonna skip that because it's a shit coin, and you should stay away from it.   Stablecoin net inflows measure the difference   between the amount of stablecoins   minted and redeemed   over a given period.   Positive inflows mean more tokens were added to the circulation   than removed,   and that signals demand   for dollar pegged   stablecoins.   Stablecoin   inflows   totaled $56,500,000,000   over the past six months, with only 10,800,000,000.0   recorded in the second quarter.  

The third quarter accounted for the bulk highlighting how quickly demand has accelerated   driven not only by USDT and USDC,   but the rise of algorithmic entrants like USDE.   Pausing to say be very careful of the algorithmic stable coin.   And if you don't know why, then you weren't here during the FTX   and, what FTX, Alameda,   BlockFi   and   was algorithmic or something like that. I they had it. It kind of it all collapsed together. But one of the things that happened at the same time was that a dollar pegged algorithmic stablecoin   completely failed its peg   and Domino started to fall. So just this algorithmic   stuff,   I I don't trust it at all. Alright. So   now Tether's USDT   accounted for the majority in both the second and third quarter, minting 19,600,000,000.0   this quarter and 9,200,000,000.0   in April to June.  

And then they talk about USDC.   And then they talk about Ethereum, but there was something in here.   Where did it go?   Hold on for a sec.   Yeah. This is this is   this is what's so important about this.   Stablecoin net inflows   jumped from $10,800,000,000   in q two   to 45.6   in q three.   That's a 324%   surge   in the demand for stablecoins.   I know that a lot of my audience is not interested in stablecoins, but stablecoins are interested in you. Well,   more likely, The United States   money printer is interested in destroying whatever wealth you have left.   Why do I say it that way? If you haven't heard me talk about it on this podcast, that means you're probably new. Welcome.  

The United States is going now has the best vehicle   in USDT   and USDC,   but more moreover,   just USDT, the the Tether stablecoin,   they have the best vehicle to print an immense amount of debt instrumentation   because Tether is going to buy the United States Treasury bonds that are printed,   and they have a huge war chest to do it. Not only do they have a standing war chest, they have gold, they have Bitcoin, they have land, and they make a shit ton of money every quarter in net revenue on maybe 70 people.   They don't have 700. They don't have 7,000.   They don't have 17,000. No. They got like 70 people and they generate   billions of dollars a quarter in net revenue, not not gross,   net revenue.  

They have more money than they know what to do with, and they always buy United States Treasury.   Now that The United States has a buyer of first, middle, and last resort   for debt instrumentation that they create   at, quote, unquote, printing money,   then that   is going to be used   hand over fist. But here's the catch.   Most of the most of the debt that's printed by the United States government is going to be exported   to other countries   via Tether.   We've never seen anything like this before in the history of economics.   It's not going to be good. It certainly won't be pleasant.  

But in the short to medium term, it's gonna be a wild ride, and we need to figure out how to position ourselves so that we don't get torn up on the other end of all this when it all goes tits up, and it will.   How?   Buy Bitcoin,   hold Bitcoin,   and don't go to Poland   because they have advanced a strict crypto bill, sparking public backlash.   Helen Parks from Cointelegraph.   Polish lawmakers approved a bill regulating the crypto asset market,   introducing key restrictions and establishing a dedicated   supervisory   authority.  

Poland's lower house of parliament,   the Szczem, and I can't pronounce it right, s e j m, voted in favor of a crypto asset market act on Friday, sending the bill to the senate for consideration.   Bill fourteen twenty four, which has yet to reflect the apparent third reading vote in the Sejem,   introduced a licensing regime for crypto asset service providers aligning Poland's regulations   with the European Union's market in crypto assets regulation or the MICA framework.   The bill's passage has sparked a strong community response over its restrictive provisions, which introduced criminal   liability for violations,   including fines of up to   10,000,000 Polish zlotys or $2,800,000   US   and prison terms of up to two years.  

The bill designates the Polish Financial Supervision   Authority,   and I cannot pronounce the name. It's like   the   KNF   as the primary   regulator for the country's crypto asset market.   Under the legislation,   all CASPs   must obtain a license from the KNF to operate in Poland.   To secure a license,   CASPs   are required to submit a comprehensive application detailing their corporate structure, capital adequacy, international controls,   internal controls and compliance systems, risk management policies, and anti money laundering procedures.   Yay. If the bill is passed   and signed into law,   CASPs in Poland will have a six month transitional period to obtain the required license.  

Failure to do so could result in cessation of operations and legal consequences.   Receiving 230   votes in favor and a 196   against,   Poland's crypto asset market act has sparked significant   backlash from both the crypto industry and some Polish lawmakers.   Januz Kowalski,   a member of this gem from the Opposition Law and Justice party criticized Poland's implementation of the EU's micro regulation, calling it overly restrictive and warning it could jeopardize the country's crypto market and its 3,000,000   crypto holders. Quote, this is the largest and most restrictive   cryptocurrency   law in the European Union, Kowalski wrote on x.  

He highlighted the law's excessive length,   describing it as   118   pages of overregulation   compared with much shorter crypto legislation in Germany, The Czech Republic, and other EU member states.   Thomas Minson,   a Polish politician and blockchain advocate, highlighted the challenges of implementing the new crypto legislation   amid Poland's lengthy regulatory procedures.   The KNF is the slowest acting regulator in the EU   with an average application processing time of thirty months.   Holy crap.   Thirty months. They're gonna have to wait to actually get this through   if this average holds up.  

You can't even do business that way.   Anyway, according to Minson,   this gem's   approval of the bill signals a potential destruction of the blockchain and stable coin industry in Poland.   He urged the senate and president, Carol Nowrocki,   to step in and veto legislation   to safeguard Poland's   crypto market. Minson's brother,   Slawomir   Minson, was among the Polish presidential candidates who vowed to create a Bitcoin reserve if elected in 2025.   In the first round on 05/18/2025,   he secured third place   with almost 15% of the vote trailing behind   no   way no way I can pronounce his name. Rafal,   that I can pronounce. I think it's Traskowski   and Naraki.  

In the runoff   of June 1, Naraki won the presidency with 50.9%   of the vote. And days before the election, he pledged   pledged to support crypto   standing up against tyrannical regulations   restricting freedom   and innovation.   Quote, in Poland,   innovations must emerge, not regulations.   As president of The Republic Of Poland,   I will be the guarantor that tyrannical   regulations restricting your freedom do not come into effect,   Naraki wrote on x, May 28.   Okay. We shall see.   We shall see.   I I don't   have a hope in hell that this thing is gonna get vetoed in in Poland.   I'll bet you Nawrocki is just one more globalist who says he's not, and y'all voted for him, and now he's in, and you guys are probably going to have a really heavy handed   crypto regulation bill become   law. Let's run the numbers.  

Energy   getting hit in the crotch, man. Brent Norsee is down three and a half points to sixty seven sixty six. West Texas Intermediate down 3.8   to sixty three seventeen.   Natural gas going the other direction. 2% to the upside now at $3.26   per thousand cubic feet. Gasoline is down two and a half points to just under $2 a gallon, and Mirbon crude is down 3.19%   to $68.98.   Shiny metal rocks are doing well except for palladium, which is down one and a third. Gold is up one and a quarter to a new all time high of $3,855   and 6 dimes. Platinum is up 1.8.  

Silver up point six five. Copper is up 2.63%.   Ag is mostly mixed.   Let's see. What do we got here? What's the biggest winner today? Biggest winner is cocoa, point 75%   to the upside. Biggest loser is coffee, one and a half to the downside. Live cattle down a third. Lean hogs down a half. Feeder cattle down   a third. The S and P is up point 11%.   Nasdaq up point four three.   The Dow is off by point 17%,   and the S and P Mini is off by a full half point.   A $113,900   per Bitcoin gives us a $2,270,000,000,000   market cap. We can now purchase 29.7   ounces of shiny metal rocks with our one Bitcoin of which there are 19,927,713.67   of. And average fees are low, 0.02   BTC taken in fees on a per block basis.  

But right now,   the roughly 45 blocks carrying a 165,000   unconfirmed transactions are going for high priority rates of 7 Satoshis per v byte.   Standard transaction that's gonna cost you just a little over a dollar. Low priority is gonna get you in for 5 sats per v byte.   And   1.04   zeta hashes   per second on the hash rate for Bitcoin again. So we are holding   above the one zeta hash threshold. I wonder how long that will happen.   We're actually   it looks like we're due for a in two days,   we've got a difficulty adjustment coming, and it looks to be a 4.8%   upwards adjustment.  

So, yeah, lots and lots and lots of hash rate came online all of a sudden.   And from BTC   forking over,   that was Friday's show of the Bitcoin and podcast.   Tulips with a thousand sats says,   Bitcoiners are the only ones having fun staying poor.   What a magnificent   line, sir.   Regarding the fork stuff, I do not agree with people pushing or publishing out of context private idea explorations.   That is how self censoring starts. And if you have your sats in cold storage, you should sleep like a baby. I sleep like a baby with not enough sats.   On the other hand, MSTR   slash coin based Bitcoiners will wake up one day on the wrong side of the fork wondering why their BTC is just tulips   and went to zero.  

Bitcoin on board with a 100 sats, some emojis that I can't see. Wartime with a 133   says cheers.   With another 133,   he says boost. With another 133,   he says zap this man. With another 133,   he says good rant. With another 133,   he says cheers again. And let's see here.   Oh, yeah. War time,   with another 133.   Sat says, yeah. I didn't know anything about a fork potentially.   I welcome it. It's been a while since we got free   coins.   Yeah. Oh. Oh. Oh. Pies   finishing finishing   us out with a 121 sat says, thank you, sir.   No.   Thank you. That's the weather report.  

Welcome to part two of the news that you can use. Strategy   Notch's third smallest Bitcoin purchase in 2025   as dividend   payments   approach.   Ah, we got some dividends that he's gotta pay out,   Andrei Beganski   from Decrypt dot CEO.   Strategy notched its third smallest Bitcoin acquisition for the year on Monday, disclosing that it only bought $22,000,000   worth of the asset.   The Tysons Corner, Virginia based firm now owns roughly 64 no. It's not 64,000.   It's, like, 600 over 640,000.   This is a huge typo.   Please decrypt.   Do some editing.  

It's all worth $73,100,000,000   as of Monday as Bitcoin climbed past a 114,000   according to crypto   data provider CoinGecko.   Although the Bitcoin purchase   that strategy disclosed on Monday was its smallest since mid August,   it appears that the move was not a result of constrained funding because strategy signaled that it had raised a $128,000,000   effectively   pocketing the difference   of, I guess, a $126,000,000   in cash.   And that cash came from selling a $116,000,000   worth of common shares. At the same time, strategy sold $11,300,000   of STRIFE offering   and $400,000   worth   of Stride offering, featuring a 10% dividend. Dividend,   STRD was unveiled as Strategy's third type of preferred shares in June. Quote,   there was an extra $106,000,000   which we can presume   was there for cash interest and to fund future dividends,   including but not limited to   those that are due tomorrow, TD Cowan analyst   Lance Vitanza told Decrypt.  

Strategy is scheduled to pay its first dividend to STRD   holders on Tuesday   on top of payouts for its STRC,   STRK,   and STRD   offerings as declared in an SEC filing   earlier this month. Strategy's obligation on STRD is currently around $30,000,000   per quarter, Vintanza   said.   That's a very small amount, he added.   And then they talk about the history of of strategy, which we've been through so many times is it's not necessary to go through. So we're gonna get to BitChat   and   Madagascar.   I guess there's shit going down in Madagascar   as a surge in protesting   over water and energy has erupted. This is Atlas twenty one.  

Recent riots in Madagascar's   capital   have triggered a spike in the use of BitChat,   the decentralized peer to peer messaging app developed by Jack Dorsey.   The surge in app activity mirrors trends already observed in Nepal   and Indonesia in recent weeks.   The protest began on September 25 in   an   Antananar   I can't pronounce   it. The Malagasy   capital   in response to the country's water and energy crisis.   Clashes with law enforcement and looting incidents led to the government to remove the energy minister and impose a curfew   on September 28. Open source developer, Cali,   reported the surge in bit chat downloads on the island,   sharing screenshots   of media coverage of the protests.  

Google Trends data confirms the trend.   Searches for BitChat rose from zero to 100 on September 26   over a ninety day period in Madagascar,   especially in the capital.   Related queries like BitChat download and how to use BitChat   chat entered the top five search terms labeled as rising topics with exponential activity growth.   Chrome stats statistics reveal that BitChat   has reached a total of 365,000   downloads since launch   with over 21,000   installations in the last day and more than 71,000   installations in the past week.   However, the data do not specify the detailed   geographic origin of these numbers.  

The surge in Madagascar   mirrors similar dynamics observed weeks earlier in Nepal   where violent anti corruption protests led to a brief social media ban, pushing protesters to seek alternative channels to organize.   Indonesia also saw a similar increase in bit chat downloads following corruption related protests.   This is good.   I don't like that there's there's riots and shit going on in any of these places,   whether it's Madagascar or Nepal or wherever,   but it's good that they have BitChat.   It's good that they have this.   The   it never ceases to amaze me   how   humans will develop   exactly what humans need   to have when they need to have it.  

Not before   not before.   We we didn't come up with we didn't come up with Bitcoin until   it was very clear that 02/2008,   you know, housing crisis and all the debacle that came after that,   that we were just gonna print money into infinity. No. We we didn't learn from 2001   when they were printing money out the wazoo, even though now when we print money, it makes 2,001   look like nothing.   Now when we print money, it makes 2,008   look like nothing. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. We just   we we it it it we had to go through the housing crisis. We had to go through 02/2001.   And if you don't remember,   when those buildings came down, there was a lot of money printing going on afterwards.  

There was a lot of money printing, not like what we see today, but there was a lot of money printing. And it was it was actually kind of   it was potentially catastrophic even back then. People are like, oh, wow. You're printing a lot of money. Well,   you ain't seen nothing yet. I'm telling you, man. Tether is gonna really, really   invigorate the money printer over in Washington   DC. But   coming back to BitChat,   if you have not looked at this, you should go look at it. It doesn't mean that you're gonna start using it. You may not have any need to use it. And if you don't,   like, I I keep coming back to this.  

People are like, nobody uses it, therefore, BitChat failed. No.   You're not using it   because you don't really need it yet, do you?   You'll wait till something happens when you have to have bit chat. That's when you're gonna be happy that it exists.   So   please stop saying that something failed just because you don't use it or no none of the people that you know use it. That doesn't mean anything.   Your little   your little observable   world   is not the whole world. Right? So it's very clear that BitChat is being used   by a lot of people in a lot of different places. Now on to Swift.  

Yes.   Swift blockchain   based ledger for twenty four seven cross border payments.   Jamie Crowley,   coindesk.com.   Global traditional finance payment system, Swift,   said it is adding a blockchain based ledger to its network. Swift is working with a group of over 30 financial institutions   to build a ledger that can make cross border payments twenty four seven based on a prototype by Ethereum   developers' consensus,   according to an announcement on Monday.   Quote, the ledger will extend Swift's financial communication role into a digital environment facilitating   banks' movement   of regulated   tokens   value across digital   ecosystems,   Swift said.  

Swift is a messaging system that supports international bank transactions   and is used by more than 11,000 financial institutions across 200 countries,   facing suggestions   that it could be made obsolete by adoption of digital assets, particularly   stable coins,   Swift has been experimenting with blockchain technology and tokenization   for several years   to try to get in front   of this potential disruption.   Swift said, it envisages   that the ledger will act as a real time log of transactions between financial institutions   record sequencing and validating,   wait a minute,   Between financial institutions,   record   sequencing, and validating transactions, and enforcing its rules through smart contracts.  

Alright. Terrible sentence, but that is the final sentence of this. You're too late, Swift.   You're   too late. It doesn't matter what you come up with. It doesn't like, I the fact that they're going with Ethereum   is laughable.   It's a Rube Goldberg   machine,   and it's not going to   do swift any favors whatsoever.   All they had to do all they had to do was use Bitcoin, but that would legitimize Bitcoin, which would effectively   say, we don't need swift   in the first place.   That's essentially what's going to happen no matter what they   do. Tether is here.  

Swift is going away.   This is a hail Mary pass like all of the other hail Mary passes that we've seen. Let's move on   to Vanguard   who has bent both knees.   They're offering third party Bitcoin   ETFs   to investors according to Alex Larry   from Bitcoin News.   Vanguard,   the $10,000,000,000,000   asset management giant   known for being cautious,   is quietly getting ready to allow its brokerage clients to buy digital asset exchange traded funds or ETFs.   This would be a big deal for the world's second largest asset manager, which has been opposed to Bitcoin products for years.   Vanguard has been opposed to Bitcoin ETFs   since their launch in 2024.  

Fidelity and BlackRock   launched their highly successful Bitcoin ETFs,   the Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund and the iShares Bitcoin Trust.   Vanguard not only chose not to launch its own Bitcoin ETF,   but also blocked its brokerage clients from buying spot Bitcoin ETFs from other funds when they first came out, citing volatility   and long term returns.   But client demand   and a more favorable regulatory environment seem to be pushing the company to change its stance. Quote,   they're being very methodical in their approach, understanding the dynamics have been changing since 2024,   a source familiar with Vanguard's plans told Crypto in America.  

According to multiple reports,   the company is laying the groundwork and talking to external partners about allowing clients to buy select third party digital asset ETFs on its brokerage platform.   Vanguard is still not expected to launch its own Bitcoin products, though. Instead,   it will follow the model of   Schwab   by offering access to ETFs that are managed by others.   Most or rather much of the speculation around Vanguard's   shift   has been around its CEO, Saleem   Ramji.   He is a former BlackRock executive,   and he helped launch iBit,   which has become one of the most successful ETFs in history   with over $80,000,000,000   in assets under management already.  

He took over at Vanguard in mid twenty twenty four, and many expected the company's stance on Bitcoin to soften.   At a conference earlier this year, Ramji highlighted   that Vanguard would not create its own digital asset ETFs,   but he dodged questions about whether clients would be able to buy third party products   through their brokerage platform.   That was enough to set off chatter on Wall Street.   Bloomberg analyst Eric Balchunas summed it up on social media, quote, Vanguard is looking to end Bitcoin ETF band   ban   AKA   bend the knee, LOL.  

We heard chatter of this too,   smart of them, end quote.   Vanguard   is reconsider considering its stance for several reasons. Analysts believe the first one is the client demand.   They They have over 50,000,000   investors.   Vanguard has faced backlash from some customers who had to move assets elsewhere to get Bitcoin exposure,   offering ETFs would help with client retention and prevent outflows to competitors.   The second one is regulation.   Since 2024,   US regulators   have become more Bitcoin friendly. The SEC recently   approved new listing standards to fast track ETF applications,   and the SEC and CFTC   have been working together to harmonize digital asset rules.  

This regulatory clarity has reduced the risk for traditional financial firms   to enter the space.   And third,   the success   of the Bitcoin ETFs is hard to ignore.   Spot Bitcoin ETFs have pulled in over $140,000,000,000   in inflows since their launch and hold more than one   wow. 1,300,000.0   BTC together.   That level of institutional   interest has made Bitcoin impossible   for Vanguard   to ignore.   So another domino falls.   Oh, well. You knew it was gonna happen. It was inevitable,   and Vanguard   has bent the knee. So,   for all the people I wanna go back to the very head of the show. For all the people that are nervous   about the core versus knots battle,   I'm here to tell you from experience,   don't be.  

If you don't want to run   version 30 of Core,   you don't have to.   And there's no reason to even upgrade, like, let's say everything was fine and nobody there was no battle in knots versus core.   They weren't gonna do this thing with the lifting of the off return limits, and it was just gonna be another major upgrade.   I still wouldn't upgrade to it until that thing's been burnt in for, like, six months.   I have I have never upgraded to the newest, latest, greatest of Bitcoin Core or even LND for that matter, except for a couple of times.   When LND, there was, like, a few zero day,   a zero day bug in it,   couple of times. And and that one, yeah, you you wanted to update as soon as you found out, but that really hasn't been the case with Bitcoin Core software.  

And I don't want to run knots. And it's not because I don't like it's not because I don't like Luke Dasher. I don't know. I've never met the man.   I   I you know, he he's a little crazy. At least some people say I don't care.   You know, chances are good for, you know, software development at this at this level. You probably want somebody who's a little slightly insane.   I don't know, but my only problem with knots is that   it's really just   Luke Dasher and maybe a couple of other people that are maintaining it.   And until they get like a real huge team of people that are all working on it, like people working on Bitcoin Core, I'm just going to let it   sit over there and they can do not stuff and, you know, be Nazis or whatever the hell we're calling everybody these days.  

But there's no reason to panic. See, this is   I fell into   a real malaise   during the twenty seventeen block size wars,   and a lot of people did because we'd this is this was the first time we had seen this kind of schism   at the level we were seeing it.   But there really wasn't a schism inside of Bitcoin Core.   And in this case, there still kinda isn't other than the fact that they kinda booted Luke Dasher over to the side and Luke Dasher's doing knots. And so in from that standpoint, there's kind of a rift but not really.   This the twenty seventeen block size stuff, it was all like basically, it was a bunch of non developers   shouting into the wind how Bitcoin fees were too high and we needed more transactions per block to get those fees down.  

And then it came. It turns out that most of that was most of those transactions   were just fake transactions to   pump up the fees   so that the argument for more block space made sense to people that didn't understand how Bitcoin worked. It was propaganda.   And I fear that we're falling into that shit again.   And if I knew then   what I know now,   I would not have felt like I got kicked in the crotch 27 times straight   because I really I felt nauseous. There was a couple of days where I literally thought I was gonna throw up.   I just felt sick   because I was like, we're, you know, we're destroying it.  

We're like, this infighting has got to stop. We're we're just sending a signal to the world   that we don't know what we're doing and that we're going to tear the very thing that we love, you know, dearly   apart   limb by limb.   I wouldn't have felt that if if   but then again,   there's no way that I could have known   what the outcome of that was gonna be unless I went through it.   And that's why I am   I'm unfazed by this.   If for whatever reason   you are feeling sick to your stomach about this   or you're like thinking I'm just going to sell it all and just be done with it, Take a deep breath   and don't act rashly.  

Think about what you're doing. Think about what Bitcoin's been through. Think about the types of attacks that we've weathered.   If you have not read the block size wars, there's a whole book. I believe it's entitled The Block Size Wars.   Go read it so that you can have an in-depth knowledge of what a lot of us that were there in 2017   experienced.   It was a terrible time in Bitcoin, and it was very, very frightening.   And I know that there's people out there right now that are also very, very frightened, and they do not have   the luxury   of having gone through the 2017   block size war being there, being on Bitcoin Twitter, seeing what was being said to each other, seeing   how Bitcoin was being ripped apart at the seams.  

Right? I have that knowledge.   I'm not saying that everything's going to be just fine and and there's gonna be unicorns out there flying around farting rainbows.   But I am saying that   the the kind of fear that this kind of thing can gin up   will destroy relationships   forever,   if you let it,   and it will it will make you worry about shit that if you get to the other side of it you realize   how much time and energy you wasted   worrying about it   I was worried   all the time in $20.17   bitcoins just fine   and Bitcoin will be fine again   if if you want to wait if you want to wade into that war just be prepared   you're probably not gonna feel good about it the best way   to do this is use your filters on on Noster and and   Facebook or whatever you use and block the words   k n o t s and c o r e.  

It's it's amazing what that can do.   Do that,   and I'll see you on the other side.   This has been Bitcoin, and and I'm your host, David Bennett. I hope you enjoyed today's episode and hope to see you again real soon.   Have a great day.