with autonomous drones there is a high level of plausible deniability so i think we will see less peace but hopefully im wrong

“On December 15, 2025, Ukraine opened a new chapter in naval warfare by using an underwater drone to strike a Russian submarine in the defended port of Novorossiysk. It was the first time a UUV had ever been used in a strike. The target was a Kilo-class submarine, valued at roughly $500 million.

UUVs operating in the Florida Straits and near the Panama Canal would put at risk the commercial arteries that carry half of American trade and the sea lanes that sustain military power projection. That is the kind of threat that changes posture overnight.

Venezuela has established a pattern of accepting foreign-enabled drone production, electronic warfare support, and strategic naval deployments. The regime has built the infrastructure (ports, coastal access, cartel logistics, sanctions evasion channels) that would support a UUV program. If Iran is willing to transfer drone manufacturing capability and deploy seabase ships into the Atlantic, the step to UUVs is not a leap. It is an extension of what is already underway. And it is the extension that would explain why Washington responded the way it did.”

https://medium.com/@mcnai002/the-venezuelan-drone-crisis-313dad18497d

if bitcoin is stolen then so be it

the alternative is to preemptively steal people’s bitcoin which is strictly worse

should we burn saylors coin because the us gov might steal it?

we roll out a quantum resistant signature scheme that is opt in, tested in the wild over time, and no coin is frozen

> a new term is necessary

yes

we roll out a new signature scheme that is opt in, tested in the wild over time, and no coin is frozen

i support that

that is not what saylor is advocating

its not backwards compatible for those who do not move to the new signature scheme

if you freeze coin that does not move to a new signature scheme it will result in a chain split

calling it a soft fork seems disingenuous

yea that too lmfao

yes, the alternative is to effectively preemptively steal their bitcoin which is strictly worse

should we burn saylors coin because the us gov might steal it?

> This still allows for coins from lost wallets and dead people to be stolen. We are cool with this?

yes, the alternative is to effectively preemptively steal their bitcoin which is strictly worse

should we burn saylors coin because the us gov might steal it?

we roll out a quantum resistant signature scheme that is opt in, tested in the wild over time, and no coin is frozen