In his April 29, 2025 video, about "Paper Bitcoin", @Matthew Kratter argues against the existence of paper Bitcoin, showing an image with BTC distribution across exchanges and banks, including Revolut. (See image below)

I have personal experience with a Revolut account (the App) only allowing $2K worth of BTC per day to a hardware wallet.

Buying $25K BTC in the Revolut App will take you 10 days to withdraw to self custody. Why would Revolut do this? Because of fractional reserving, or paper Bitcoin. You THINK you have $25K in BTC, but Revolut only bought $2K, $5K or $10K worth, so when you start to withdraw, Revolut delays the process and buys more BTC to "fill their reserves" measured over all customers. This is very dangerous and exactly the reason why banks fail.

So while Revolut may indeed have 28543 BTC at Coinbase, nobody knows how much 'paper BTC' they have sold in their App to customers. My experience with Revolut indicates that they are selling more, they are levered up.

Revolut's crypto terms and conditions explicitly state: "We may limit the amount of cryptoassets you withdraw. We will tell you the amount of any limit before we accept your instruction."

Hey Matt,
at 4:56 in your video, you say/write, "The supply of new Bitcoin does NOT increase" which is technically correct, but factually also incorrect.

A friend bought BTC within his European Revolut bank app. He asked my help transferring it to cold storage. Revolut only allowed $2K in value to be withdrawn daily. This was in March-2024, I don't know their current policy. Back then, customer service flatly refused a full transfer. Only option was selling the BTC, move the money elsewhere, repurchase, and move to cold storage. The whole process was tiring and without my help this friend would have given up.

Moral of the story: Banks will abuse the ingrained need for convenience by non-tech BTC prospects to 'increase the supply', or put differently, to sell these people the 'beneficial right' to BTC as Revolut calls it in their terms and conditions.

Hey @jb55,
Although I share your enthusiasm, it's also good to ask, "Coud I be wrong?" which leads to researching other opinions.

I found the article below about the inevitable centralisation of Lightning, which means... in our enthusiasm, we are just recreating the Fiat network with easy central control and censorship.

Only those who delve into the Lightning network will be able to understand the intricacies. It's not easy and many will never understand it. Opening channels for example, or the inability to move sats to BTC self custody once the BTC price and mining fees move higher.

We hope that developers will solve these issues, but as they do, they are building a highly centralised network with big nodes (Wallet of Satoshi, Acinq, Binance, Kraken etc) that are easily co-opted by government. BTC exchanges already require KYC, what if big Sat hubs are next?

https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800

Links to thorough articles refuting the article above are highly welcome.

Hey Pablo,
a quick NIP idea I wanted to leave with you. How about a plugin that websites can use allowing Nostr users to subcribe for updates using their npub? The benefits:
(1) Increases Nostr network effect and growth.
(2) Gives users anonymity when signing up at different sites.
(3) Sites cannot sell user names and emails anymore.
(4) Site hacks? No problem, only npubs end up on the street, instead of names and emails on the Dark web.
(5) Those websites are incentivised to publish on Nostr, increasing opportunities for donations and commerce with Zaps instead of fiat.
(6) Nostr user account differentiation. The account, posts and messages about gardening don't mix with the posts and messages about political debate. This increases user privacy.
Listing above benefits, it seems an easy sell, especially to websites with decreasing subscriptions and unending fiat settlement issues.

Modern slaves are not in chains, they are in debt.

But... remember that voluntary slavery is not against the law. Have you tried talking to one of those debt slaves recently? About planning an escape? About doing the work? In their eyes, YOU are the crazy one.

The fashion industry (also) as attack vector has passed the conspiracy theory phase a long time ago. The unattractiveness is just a recent addition. Find any book or documentary on Morgellon fibers, which cause skin problems for millions. The worst sufferers can literally pull the fibers from under their skin. Most victims have no clue that their polyester or spandex clothing might cause the problem. And similar to the Covid jabs, the dose is randomised for plausible deniability. Your best bet is strictly cotton and dump any piece of clothing that generates even a hint of itching.

Jimmysong, "I don't have many moments on here where I find new people to follow"

Could it be that most people are uninteresting, working their day job, returning home, taking vacations, hardly reading books, or only the MSM promoted ones, getting sick and not understanding why, still jabbing their kids against measles?

Being truly interesting and followable online or offline is hard work and requires an unconventional mindset devoid of fear. Most people don't make that cut. I was utterly shocked how easily many bent/rolled over in 2020/21, just shocked. How I miss pre-2020 when almost everybody seemed interesting. Life was good in that garden of perception.

Thus indeed, an algo scanning for the next Lyn Alden or Jimmy Song makes total sense.

Hey NakamotoX,
I guess it's 2 - 0 for you.
(1) Indeed, after "doing the work" by reading the white paper, watching videos and reading books, BTC is here to stay, no matter who invented it.
(2) Also, Mark Kratter from channel Bitcoin University answers my initial question. https://odysee.com/@TraderUniversity:a/did-the-nsa-create-bitcoin:0