BSV = Utility. Powering the next generation of Metanet apps, protecting user privacy and unlocking new potential with micropayments.
Oregon, United States
Joined May 2021
- Tweets6K
- Following182
- Followers2.5K
- Likes1.6K
Pinned Tweet
We’re not heading toward a crisis.
We’re already past the point of no return.
What’s coming isn’t a crash — it’s a sorting event.
For 20 years, we optimized for convenience.
For 10 years, we optimized for engagement.
Now we’re optimizing for control.
AI didn’t break the system.
It completed it.
One stack. One feed. One identity layer.
One permission slip for existence.
This is the end-state of the Tenant economy:
• You don’t own your audience
• You don’t own your data
• You don’t own your identity
• You don’t even own your attention
You rent reality.
And here’s the part most people miss:
This doesn’t end with revolution.
It ends with compliance.
Most people won’t fight the cage.
They’ll upgrade it.
Frictionless. Managed. Safe.
A perfectly optimized life — curated by machines that know you better than you know yourself.
That path already has a name.
It’s comfortable.
It’s popular.
And it’s irreversible.
But there’s another trajectory — quieter, harder, smaller.
It doesn’t ask for permission.
It doesn’t wait for consensus.
It doesn’t try to “fix” the system.
It routes around it.
That path starts with one principle:
If you don’t hold the keys, you don’t own anything.
Not your money.
Not your words.
Not your history.
Not yourself.
The future splits here.
On one side:
Centralized AI, managed identities, narrative enforcement, infinite noise.
On the other:
Self-custody. Cryptographic identity. Direct value exchange. Small, high-trust networks.
Not mass adoption.
Selection.
This is what Metanet is built for.
Not another platform.
Not another audience trap.
Not another “Web3” casino.
Metanet is infrastructure for people who already know the game is over — and want out before the snap.
• Identity without permission
• Value without middlemen
• Truth anchored in proof, not feeds
• Networks that scale sideways, not upward
When the brittle systems break — and they will — the survivors won’t be the loudest.
They’ll be the ones who already left.
This isn’t about “winning the internet.”
It’s about remaining human when the internet stops being real.
No saviors are coming.
No reforms are coming.
No rollback is coming.
There is only one move left:
Build parallel.
Build sovereign.
Build now.
Metanet isn’t the future.
It’s the exit.
And the door doesn’t stay open forever.
GetMetanet.com
MetanetAcademy.com
MetanetApps.com
Join.BSV.Chat
MetanetMeetup.com
iykyk
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
So...all exchanges?
Who is to judge manipulation and suppression? And to what end?
Better to admit mistakes were made and get listed everywhere possible.
This purist attitude does more damage than blockstream trolls. You're doing Greg's work.
Here’s my tentative plan for closing the remaining gaps, so that we can eliminate remaining WoC / scanning dependencies across Wallet and Overlay Services.
github.com/bsv-blockchain/ts…
For the record: I want to encourage anyone who supports this kind of intellectual dishonesty, deadcatting, and shameful mischaracterization of facts to immediately and permanently BOYCOTT all Babbage products and services.
Violence and hate have no place here. #BSV
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
In my opinion, apps should hold a percentage of their funds in a stablecoin and the remainder in BSV (accounting for volatility risk)—a proportion that should increase as BSV demonstrates its utility.
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
The HD wallet problem isn’t hypothetical. Once a Chinese BSV app reached meaningful wallet usage, it had to pay an indexing service per user per month for full recovery and address indexing. Costs scaled with every user. @ProjectBabbage
What do you all think about this BRC?
Is a blockchain some magical database in the sky that you can rely on to store data you put on-chain forever with no additional charges besides the tx fee?
Why would platforms like WhatsOnChain keep providing access to that data for free when there are tangible costs associated with doing so?
1. I accept that #BSV relisting on major US/global exchanges would lower barriers to entry and accelerate mass adoption of BSV apps.
2. I accept accountability, that delisting from exchanges was largely due to BSV's own actions, and litigation against them from past BSV figures.
39%Both yes, let's own it
16%Both no, Babbage is WRONG
41%1 Yes 2 No, we're victims
4%1 No 2 Yes, BSV is a joke
173 votes • 3 daysMy practical position is any lawful, affordable route that gets customers funded and creators paid. 51 MTL licenses do not count as affordable. Specific conduct deserves accountability; its weight in each provider’s decision needs evidence.
xitter.cf/ProjectBabbage/status/…
1) The customer I mean has already found a game or artist they want to pay. They need an easy way to fund their wallet; the recipient may need a way to cash out.
We still have to build and market apps people want. Exchange access can help someone complete a payment; it does not make them want the app. Buying BSV to spend also does not require day trading. Integrated ramps and workable peer-to-peer routes count too. Relisting is one route to better access, not the goal itself.
2) Accountability follows actual conduct. Exchanges own their listing decisions. Individuals and institutions own the claims, threats and litigation they choose to make or support. I own what I publish and defend. Ordinary holders are not collectively guilty.
We can demand fair treatment from exchanges and stop excusing harmful conduct by our own advocates. Repairing damaged relationships may help reopen access; it cannot guarantee relisting.
The practical test is whether a new customer can fund a wallet, pay for something they want, and whether the recipient can use or cash out the proceeds. Let's compare proposed solutions against that journey: availability, fees, minimums and steps.
FireSnakeGame.com needs BRC100 wallets where users can acquire the BSV they want in order to have fun easily, right in the wallet itself, as part of that experience. TempoMusic.net needs wallets where an artist can withdraw the BSV they earned from music royalties, and have it deposited into their bank account.
That's all.
First BRC100 wallet where FireSnakeGame.com user can topup WINS THE GAME! 🚀
They will be featured alongside this game on the ProjectBabbage.com homepage if I can send it to all my friends and have them USE IT EASILY! !!
This is how #BSV wins 💪
Ramp doesn't work and always locks my card. I'm glad you're looking at solutions though, that is the right approach to take.
I hope we can find some. Right now, people just don't have the tooling. First BRC100 wallet where FireSnakeGame.com user can topup WINS THE GAME! 🚀
It's been almost 4 years since I made this video about this very same issue, so this has been a long time coming.
This is just my way of starting this conversation in earnest, it is very possible that the specific dates, volume metrics, and activation criteria should be changed to align more closely with actual provider costs. Just my best guesses.
People are, of course, free to ignore this spec if they so choose, and continue serving data for free, but its existence at this point in time should surprise no one:
youtube.com/watch?v=W_mKNNHp…
🚨🚨I now propose BRC-234, a way to finally retire the reliance upon zero-cost full-chain scanning and indexing systems.
Today, too many applications operate under the flawed assumption that private keys alone are sufficient for coin recovery. No longer.
github.com/bsv-blockchain/BR…
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
Throwback to THREE years ago:
youtube.com/watch?v=W_mKNNHp…
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
What do you all think about this BRC?
Is a blockchain some magical database in the sky that you can rely on to store data you put on-chain forever with no additional charges besides the tx fee?
Why would platforms like WhatsOnChain keep providing access to that data for free when there are tangible costs associated with doing so?
🚨🚨I now propose BRC-234, a way to finally retire the reliance upon zero-cost full-chain scanning and indexing systems.
Today, too many applications operate under the flawed assumption that private keys alone are sufficient for coin recovery. No longer.
github.com/bsv-blockchain/BR…
🚨🚨I now propose BRC-234, a way to finally retire the reliance upon zero-cost full-chain scanning and indexing systems.
Today, too many applications operate under the flawed assumption that private keys alone are sufficient for coin recovery. No longer.
github.com/bsv-blockchain/BR…
so thinkin the first million blocks r free then ya gotta pay after that
new brc soon i'll explain later 😂
#bsv
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
I'm going to use Joel's post here as an opportunity to explain why we're doing what we're doing at BSVA and the BRC process (which was started in large part thanks to @ProjectBabbage)
Backwards compatibility is a virtue, until what you’re staying compatible with is the bottleneck.
Joel’s point is fair in general. New software usually should respect what came before. But the way Bitcoin wallets have always worked is not how Bitcoin was designed to work. It’s a workaround that stopped working the moment BSV got busy.
We’ve already tested it at scale. BSV has mined blocks of nearly 4GB. When application traffic peaked, the network kept producing blocks. What fell over was everything around it: indexers, exchanges, explorers, ElectrumX servers, and services that tried to keep up by scanning the whole chain for every address they cared about. Mining scaled. The application layer didn’t.
That’s the core problem with the ElectrumX model. A wallet asks a server, “What happened to my addresses?” To answer, that server has to index everyone’s history. Its cost grows with the whole network, not with its users. At 4GB blocks, that design isn’t old-fashioned. It’s broken.
Satoshi’s design was different. Payments go directly between the people involved. The original client even let you pay straight to an IP address. The whitepaper describes Simplified Payment Verification (SPV): you keep block headers and check a Merkle proof for the transactions that matter to you. Nobody has to watch the entire chain on your behalf.
That’s what the BRC-100 stack is built on. Transactions travel peer-to-peer with their own proofs attached (BEEF), and wallets verify them against headers. Your wallet’s workload grows with your own activity, not the world’s.
Does that make us right about everything? No. People raised real criticisms of MessageBox, and that’s directly why work is now underway (Thank you @deggen !) on WebRTC-based peer-to-peer connections. Keep the criticism coming. Better still, contribute. We want this to be the most scalable, usable stack ever built, and that takes people breaking it.
But “it’s not compatible with how we’ve always done things” isn’t a reason to stop. How we’ve always done things is what failed under real load. The miners are ready for terabyte blocks. Wallets and apps have to be designed to keep up now, not after the next wave of traffic takes them down again.
I think Joel, Cryptorebel, and others are raising good points that require us all to communicate in good faith. I hope to be a part of facilitating that conversation moving forward!
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
This is pretty cool stuff and on BSV, even better. 😎 I recall someone sending Bitcoins over ham radio circa 2013, so this isn't completely new. 😁
Babbage | BRC100 retweeted
What holds BSV back the most is the lack of a technical, public, and honest debate—one aligned with real incentives. It’s time to accelerate this!