Is the NEW Pro-Bitcoin Fed Appointee About to LAUNCH a Super-Cycle?? | Simply SatoSHE

No sound for this episode

No audio coming through. Other TFTC shows no problem. This one seems to be blank (at least for the first minutes).

Have subscribed now... Not seeing the episode. What's up, Marty?

Adding to previous boost after topping off via lightning.

Every day we get closer to BIP110's admitted plan to execute a coup d'état against the protocol. Can you dedicate a small portion of TWIB to give a weekly update all on the fight against that selfish dumbassery?

Make sure to mention repeatedly, for the benefit of the Southern District of New York Attorney General, that your joke about availability of code RHR for a discount on Strait-of-Hormuz Bitcoin shipping insurance premiums payable to Iran was a parody or completely a joke and not to be taken seriously.

Interested to hear your thoughts around the Q2/26 timeframe for bitcoin awareness, adoption, and USD price. Several big events then... Taxes being paid (returns to the plebs), Warsh confirmation hearings and maybe Fed pump, election campaigns in full swing, maybe Alito being replaced, maybe market clarity being passed... So much. So much. Keep up the fire, brother.

It's not about breaking the wallets. It's about litigious grifting. By making a claim on "dormant" bitcoin in the New York, the claimant, a Wyoming LLC, sets up two scenarios: 1. If Quantum "breaks" a wallet previously awarded, the Wyoming LLC will use their legal title to sue for possession/compensation (or be paid to go away). 2. Ahead of Quantum being a real threat, the Wyoming LLC can sell itself with the legal title to the bitcoin addresses as part of its book value.

Appreciate you. Keep up the fire.

Good music

Yeah sad news. Multi-vendor, Multi-sig, .... and maybe even multi institution (calling On ramp and Anchor). This was serious and worth spending time to resolve, unlike bip-110's general waste of everyone's time.

Moving from one digital asset to another digital asset is always a taxable event, regardless of whether you are gaining or losing based on the trading pair directly. The key is the cost basis of the asset from which you move. Let's say you bought some bitcoin at $100,000 and sell any portion of that bitcoin for $110,000, then your cap gain would be based on the difference between the original cost basis and the value at sale. That example would be a gain; however, if you buy some bitcoin at $100,000 and sell at $60,000, then you have a capital loss, which can also be accounted for in your taxes.. Buying and selling is not just buying and selling into dollars; it's buying and selling into any other virtual currency or asset or for a service or for a Snickers and a Mountain Dew at the local corner store. That's why the de minimis tax argument and conversation is so important to some; others? Well, let's just say some people don't or won't do math. Not tax advice. Do your own research. If you're concerned about it then manage your UTXO and hire an accountant.

Regarding your hackathon and bitcoin test payments over lightning for agents and the like, I think I have to re-run a pen test on my systems (emails chats and phone calls with my team) and maybe switch to Maple.ai, too, lol. Good luck.

Guy - Please tell Allan his theory is not half-baked at all. I have the benefit of a front row seat for this play & the rest of the banker audience have no idea what's coming. That light ahead in the stablecoin tumnel is not the other end opening on an electronic Fiat utopia. It's the bitcoin train coming straight at them.... Nothing stops this train.

Lost me at Hyperliquid

Thanks for this revealing session. Start 9 in officially dead to me now.

Drink every time I hear "howlve"

Getting an error code when I try to play

Accuracy was poor.. older stories presented as new on this one.