bergealex4
Alex B.

Public Key

npub16fhh3ev4gytmt3jn3gkkez9z99kxtspcwupen4cxn2tcym4sd22surn62p

NIP-05 Address

bergealex@bitcoinpark.com

NIP-57 Address

alexb@primal.net

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsdymmcuk25z9a4cefc5ttv3z3zjmr9cqu8wque6urf49uzd6cx49g5mu28n

Author Public Key

npub16fhh3ev4gytmt3jn3gkkez9z99kxtspcwupen4cxn2tcym4sd22surn62p

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-05-14 07:49:42

- reply

No. The contract involves the operator funding an output onchain for you. You are responsible for rolling your claim over to another batch. If you fail to do so, the operator will sweep the output at termination of the contract as originally specified. The operator keeps no account of its users unlike custodial services.

2025-05-13 23:23:01

- reply

If you don’t extend your contract with the operator technically it’s not your money anymore, it’s theirs.
They may decide to give it back to you but they are not a custodian.

2025-04-23 12:49:53

- reply

We created the first prototype wallet for Ark, called Arkade. It is not currenty public but it has helped us uncover a lot of interesting design challenges around Ark.
Happy to share our insights with anyone who might want to take up this project 😃

2025-04-23 06:33:53

New Ark Simple explainer & FAQ
https://docs.arklabs.xyz/
Bitcoin's blockchain offers strong security guarantees at the tradeoff of limited transaction throughput, high fees, and settlement delays, restricting its practical use for various applications requiring greater scalability, lower costs, or faster settlement.
Ark addresses these limitations primarily through a novel batching technique, aggregating numerous individual Bitcoin transactions into a single onchain Bitcoin commitment—called a Batch Output. This significantly reduces transaction costs per user and greatly enhances scalability.
The protocol mirrors Bitcoin’s familiar UTXO structure using Virtual Transaction Outputs (VTXOs). These offchain abstractions preserve a familiar output ownership model while embedding many claims into a single Batch Output. VTXOs ensure that users retain unilateral control over their funds and enable efficient offchain coordination before final settlement on Bitcoin.
Link for details!
👾

2025-04-18 13:03:11

- reply

Ark funds are a contract betweent you and the server. He puts up the liquidity to fund batches to provide this service he needs to be able to cycle liquidity. At expiry the batch is swept by the server.
He might decide it's a good business decision to not run away with it if you're a good user. That's up to him.

2025-04-18 12:32:57

Last weekend at @blockspacepod’s OP_NEXT, we demoed Arkade — a prototype wallet built on the Ark protocol, live on Bitcoin mainnet.
While just a proof-of-concept, it pointed to something bigger:
A new class of Bitcoin applications is possible today, without consensus changes.
Much of OP_NEXT focused on what soft forks might unlock. That’s important work — and we support it.
But our focus has been different:
Delivering utility with the Bitcoin we already have.
The Arkade Wallet isn’t just a teaser.
It’s a working step toward reframing what’s possible on Bitcoin — here and now.
Many so-called L2s are still theoretical.
Ark is real. It’s on mainnet. And it’s moving.
Ark isn’t a Lightning replacement.
It opens up an entirely different design space:
Modular apps, flexible coordination, programmable flows.
Arkade is more than a wallet — it’s the first look at a Bitcoin-native platform.
We’re building toward a future where Bitcoin isn’t just a store of value.
It’s the foundation for programmable money and sovereign capital markets.
The tools are open. Let’s build.
🔗 github.com/ArkLabsHQ/wallet-sdk
👾 https://m.primal.net/QUsN.gif

2025-03-16 04:41:46

Ark will 10x the Lightning self custodial user experience.
The days of channels and liquidity management are behind us.
Just swap.
(no soft fork needed)
👾

2025-02-21 14:29:18

We built a Coinflip PoC using multiparty contracts on Ark!
Bonus points: it uses Nostr on the backend.
Ark's client-server architecture, built around presigned transactions, provides an interesting framework for coordinating complex multi-party interactions.
A key insight from our Coinflip implementation: Ark operators validate spending conditions off-chain, such that in the optimistic case, complex validation logic doesn't hit the blockchain at all.
Once the game concludes, players settle their balance without intermediary trust.
It's available here: Coinflip is available here: http://coinflip.casino
Check it out! 👾 https://m.primal.net/PFcL.png

2025-02-20 18:08:35

- reply

This is not LN on Ark this is just a normal spillman style payment channel.
I fail to see how this is more liquidity than LN. It’s infinitely better for LSPs who don’t have to tie up liquidity in channels with random users. Now that is expensive (Phoenix)

2025-02-20 16:51:15

- reply

That’s fine either way. I’ll work with people to build a Lightning enabled wallet that blows native ones out of the water then we can check back on the “liquidity issues”.

2025-02-20 16:48:25

- reply

You clearly haven’t given this much thought.
I can open a single channel towards an LSP and make unlimited number of payments, in Ark, without any liquidity requirement aside from the initial deposit.

2025-02-20 05:45:42

- reply

A self-custodial Ark wallet allows users to interface with Lightning payments via swaps in a perfectly non-custodial manner, without exposing them to the friction of channel or liquidity management, or overcharging them to abstract those.
It is the best self-custodial Lightning experience you can possibly create, bar none.
Every Ark builder is interested in complementing Lightning and leveraging the synergies between both technologies. It's a shame you can't recognize the potential here.

2025-02-18 03:57:29

- reply

If a server that allows you to batch transactions with others is an L2 then yes you can call it that.

2025-02-08 10:51:29

- reply

Actual work on an Ark implementation began a year ago at most.
It's been more or less 6 months since teams are working full time on the protocol.
It takes some time but you should expect Ark integration on mainnet within 3-4 months.

2025-02-08 10:48:47

- reply

Rolling over your VTXOs (participating in a transaction batch) is a bit of an involved process and needs to be abstracted away from users as much as possible but that's an implementation and app level concern that is not a deal breaker.

2025-02-08 10:13:34

Ark is sufficient as a scaling solution for the foreseeable future.
We have a lot to learn from the implications it will have on self custodial applications and the entire Lightning ecosystem.
If you're interested in additional opcodes to Bitcoin for security concerns then that's a different conversation but we have plenty of time to put together a compelling vision that can put consensus in motion.

2025-02-03 03:01:31

- reply

While timeout tree is technically accurate it does nothing to actually explain the purpose of the protocol so I can't say I'm a fan of this description.
As far as I'm concerned, I've had the most success describing Ark as a batching protocol.
It's a familiar concept that resonates with people and doesn't appear overly complex.
https://m.primal.net/ONmE.png

2025-02-02 01:01:36

- reply

You might say this is semantics but it’s been a useful distinction because every conversation around Ark I’ve had from people who thought of it as a payment pool led to the misconception that:
- There is a single global state UTXO
- Participating users must sign off on state updates

2025-02-02 00:56:55

- reply

You don’t need the majority of users to generate sufficient economic demand onchain.
Realistically only a small percentage suffice.

2025-02-01 14:50:35

- reply

The world will adapt to Bitcoin.
Not much else is needed.
Adjusting economic inputs regardless of the motivation is an exercise in centralization.

2025-02-01 14:08:44

- reply

It’s quite incredible that this type of discourse is being held by Bitcoiners.
“What if consumers do no spend enough, we might have to twist the knobs of the economy to fix it”
Layer 2s are anchored in Bitcoin. They directly lead to more economically dense transactions, if adopted.
Trying to intervene with the market is a surefire way to screw ourselves

2025-02-01 13:11:08

- reply

Now that we can batch transactions thanks to Taproot and connectors, every prior needs to be reexamined.
The return on investment for developing solutions that leverage this new paradigm is far greater than hand-wringing over the block size.

2025-02-01 12:52:02

- reply

We can rebalance Lightning channels offchain.
The Lightning whitepaper is dated and not relevant anymore.
Bullish ingenuity. Bearish magic numbers and central planning.

2025-01-29 01:36:40

Since somebody asked…
We currently use Nostr in our PoC Ark wallet to enable users to recover expired VTXO funds.
https://m.primal.net/OFOh.jpg

2025-01-29 01:28:03

- reply

Hey! Yes, Boltz integration being completed as we speak. More on that soon.
>configure swap server
Absolutely

2025-01-26 02:12:14

By the way this is an interesting option for Nostr apps to integrate bitcoin payments/wallet functionality.
Different risk profile than ecash, less private out the box.
#note1r8z…85dw

2025-01-25 02:28:48

Hey Nostr,
been a while heh. we’ll try to fix that… eventually.
Meanwhile, we just released our Ark wallet SDK!
It’s still at a very early stage but you can now interact with an Ark server, on signet.
Details 👇
https://blog.arklabs.to/introducing-the-ark-wallet-sdk-d1c77ce61cfc

2024-11-28 08:33:55

If you truly want to accelerate covenant traction then the single best thing you can probably do is to contribute to development, tooling, and adoption of Ark.
It's the one thing every single one of you have control over.

2024-11-28 07:57:26

- reply

The UTXO you are trying to swap for doesn't yet exist.
How would that work?

2024-11-26 18:10:00

- reply

Thanks for the honest feedback. We're definitely working towards making the documentation more developer friendly.

2024-10-16 14:21:55

- reply

😘

2024-10-16 12:04:44

- reply

Everyone having a computer is justified.
Ever user being a node in a network defeats the entire purpose.
It's like asking every internet user to run their own ISP.

2024-10-16 11:10:52

Ark offers a simple, secure way to optimize onchain costs for pretty much every Bitcoin use cases.
More complex and fancy ways to create channel factories or coinpools might exist but no one is building them nor are they likely too because the complexity invites inertia always.
The longer you look at Ark the more you realize that simple approaches win and we can simply iterate off this as we find product market fit.
Anyone that is interested to learn more or contribute please reach out I’m happy to take a minute to help people familiarize themselves with the protocol.

2024-10-16 11:06:57

- reply

I don’t think it’s productive or desirable for the average person to run a Lightning node.
In fact I’m convinced it’s economically unsustainable.

2024-10-15 10:23:21

- reply

No they didn't. VC-backed companies are not the economically significant actors within the Bitcoin community.
Actual skin in the game Bitcoin holders wanted nothing to do with the fork, as evidenced, for example, by Finex's futures market at the time.

2024-10-15 09:49:56

- reply

Most of the world does not need to run a Lightning node.
In fact, that would probably be detrimental to Lightning altogether.

2024-10-15 09:48:58

- reply

UASF worked because economically significant actors rallied behind it.
The larp of every user running a node just for the sake of defending the network is just that... a larp

2024-10-15 09:45:57

- reply

>Main reason to run a node is to keep the network decentralized.
No... the main reason to run a node is to validate your own transactions privately.
Plebs of little to no economic relevance have practically no impact on the outcome of forks or Bitcoin's "decentralization".
Run a node for your own benefit, or don't, but let's not pretend doing so is an altruistic act.

2024-10-11 16:11:07

We just announced yesterday in Amsterdam that @`Boltz - Non-Custodial Bitcoin Bridge` swaps are coming to Ark, day 1!
Thanks to native support for Bitcoin script operations, Ark allows servers to virtualize many of the same contracts used by existing Bitcoin products and services.
One we're excited about are Virtual HTLCs (vHTLCs). Combined with off-chain execution, we think they open the door to many new, and old, use cases that weren't possible before, or could not scale.
Those properties can extend to other script extensions of Bitcoin and potentially scale smart contract settlements!
Using virtual swaps, we can close Lightning's "liquidity loop" by providing participants with an interface to batch their channel management operations off-chain.
Many infrastructure providers will find interesting ways to leverage the efficiency of Ark swaps and we encourage anyone interested to reach out @npub1hf5…dp8n
https://m.primal.net/LSdV.jpg

2024-09-26 12:38:30

A lot of angst and pessimism on the timeline over the last 24 hours around the prospect of future upgrades to the Bitcoin protocol.
TLDR; A number of highly technical people got together and apparently could not come to an agreement on the various tradeoffs of theoretical applications of covenants and associated OP codes.
Frankly, this is the least surprising outcome anyone could have expected out of this type of exercise.
Putting a bunch of gigabrain engineers into a room is not conducive to consensus. They will, by nature, try to outsmart one another.
"You haven't considered this angle."
"What if we approached it this way?"
"There's a more efficient way."
"Have you really thought through the implications?"
Their drive to achieve the 'right' outcome fuels a race to devise "clever" solutions, each inevitably clashing with the alternatives.
If you're wondering why you should care about this at all. It's because most people involved do agree that multi-party on-chain contracts are necessary to achieve true scale.
The limitations of two-party Lightning channels are increasingly obvious hence the interest in optimizing the flow of capital around the network across larger hubs of individuals sharing UTXOs.
Unfortunately, the lack of first-hand experience with covenant-based constructs is allowing everyone’s imagination to run wild.
We are all attempting to optimize for the end game with little to no appreciation for the present situation.
Some have devised clever ways to implement zero-knowledge technology using Bitcoin script. Others are designing coin pool protocols that can potentially withstand the mass exit of hundreds of thousands of users without catastrophic economic consequences.
All of them are frustrated others can't seem to be as excited as them about their progress.
Meanwhile, a credible opportunity to further our common understanding of multi-party contracts is staring everyone in the face: the Ark protocol.
Unsurprisingly, most every one of these very competent individuals have their own opinions of it.
"The liquidity requirements are too high."
"It can't possibly work without covenants."
"Fees and unilateral exit scenarios are tricky."
Again, not only only are these experts seemingly fixated on perfecting the 'right' outcome, but at times it feels like they’re trying to control it.
My advice to everyone involved: let go of this obsession with perfection and embrace the good.
There are now two teams iterating through various ways to implement Ark in ways that can solve real problems, TODAY.
Sure, Ark as originally proposed and as currently implemented is not yet the ubiquitous payment grail it was originally propped up as.
A lot of different adversarial scenarios will challenge the different use cases vying to leverage it, but if you give it honest consideration, you will realize it is MUCH more practical than some would want you to believe.
It does not need to immediately find its way into retail user wallets to have a massive impact on the current Bitcoin payment infrastructure.
Various existing sets of counterparties should be able to use Ark as a simple and straightforward way to amortize the cost of their on-chain operations.
And if all you care about is to achieve pie-in-the-sky perfection then there is probably no better alternative as we speak to gain real world economic feedback on the behavior of users of those future protocols.
If you want to accelerate the development of technology that will directly inform the design of future covenant-based evolutions, I believe there is no better way to funnel your energy today than to participate in the conversation, contribute and start building on Ark.
Join us!
https://arkdev.info

2024-09-26 12:38:16

2024-08-30 14:41:02

- reply

lmao nahhhhhhhh

2024-08-30 01:55:15

- reply

TBD's biggest challenge is that it deals in consortium, top down hierarchies and institutionalized standards, making it pretty unlikely to ever gain significant traction.

2024-08-29 23:00:22

- reply

there was supposed to be an embedded video but that was a total fail

2024-08-29 22:56:47

GLOBAL MONEY
LOCAL NUTS 🥜
My #BHB talk

2024-08-29 22:15:52

Nostr : TCP/IP
Whatever they're building over there : OSI
Let's keep things weird folks cause this stuff going on over there is... uh... disturbing
https://block.xyz/inside/block-partners-with-commerce-department-NIST-to-accelerate-development-and-adoption-of-digital-identity

2024-08-29 17:52:36

- reply

You explained to me? 🤣
You sent me a "primer" I wrote 🤣
Dead

2024-08-29 16:30:18

- reply

You're literally the one parotting talking points. It's right there in your notes. You reference things you do not understand and just throw link to support your "feelings".
If I were to ask you to explain any of the subjects discussed you wouldn't be able to.
There is nothing to rebutt, you didn't bring up anything substantial.

2024-08-29 16:15:45

- reply

Pretty!

2024-08-29 16:02:46

- reply

You are talking about things again which you don't understand. Understandably this makes you afraid.
You cannot "see" anything. You are just feeling because you can't verify yourself.

2024-08-29 12:53:38

- reply

I have made the case for why CTV is safe, you are just not able to understand it because of simple technical shortcomings. This is not an ad hominem, simply an observation.
Do you imagine people will spoonfeed everything to you?
These conversations will carry on without you and you will remain puzzled and confused when changes happen because all you rely on are your feelings.

2024-08-29 12:38:36

- reply

I'm not advocating for CTV. I'm just pointing out that your lack of technical knowledge will hinder your ability to understand those things and participate in such conversations because all of your arguments are based on feelings, not facts.
There is no "we" in this. A soft fork proposal doesn't need you if YOU can't show the proof-of-work as to why your opinion is valuable or worthy of consideration.
Hence, when improvements to Bitcoin script inevitably come, you will be left screaming in the void because the stakes for you are clearly not enough to have an informed, non-biased, opinion.

2024-08-29 12:08:24

- reply

You lock your bitcoins to a spending script.
It's as technically safe as P2SH and doesn't disrupt network ecosystem because it's just a spending conditions on coins.
Can you demonstrate and prove that CLTV, CSV, P2SH are technically safe and also doesn’t disrupt the network ecosystem?
If not we might have to remove them :/

2024-08-29 01:58:55

What's the best way to follow everyone mentioned in a list/note like this?
#note1cyh…qqrs

2024-08-29 01:51:31

- reply

You clearly don't understand CTV

2024-08-29 01:20:05

- reply

There's nothing CTV gives us that brings us much further along in the near term, at all.
I would listen to Rusty's latest recording with the Brink team to get a better sense of what actual improvement makes sense.
We can do better and we have plenty of time to unlock true scripting capabilities that will be long lasting and enable all use cases we might want.

2024-08-28 13:58:22

Also @npub1m0s…qp5h is the creator!
Get his numbers up and zap him for doing Satoshi's work!
#note16uy…t6va

2024-08-28 13:36:21

In NostRiga @npub1lun…27lj had this intuition Web-Of-Trust is deflationary. He is correcdt!
There is no better explanation of this than MP's "GPG Contracts" article.
http://trilema.com/2012/gpg-contracts/
The potential of this is MASSIVE. It's a complete shift from the society we live in. https://m.primal.net/KRho.png

2024-08-28 13:31:03

We all love Bitcoin and it is the future but to bootstrap the AI <> Nostr flywheel we must put into developers' hands money they're familiar with.
This is where stablechannels come in!
@npub1zfy…m60l's talk at @npub155m…dcvg day further convinced me that this is a very powerful idea.
It doesn't have to be perfect. It JUST WORKS at small scale and is extremely sticky!
h/t @npub1mz3…mymx @npub1cd0…xlvx

2024-08-28 13:21:20

- reply

make them stable!

2024-08-26 20:28:34

- reply

it doesn’t compete with cashu and it’s not built on top of lightning

2024-08-26 19:42:05

- reply

No. This will be live on mainnet soon.
Covenants can make it better but it doesn’t require a fork

2024-08-26 19:11:40

Feels like a completely new world opened up to me this weekend.
Euro-bitcoin feels different. No nonsense. High character. Diverse and open-minded.
Can’t believe I’ve missed out on this for so long.
Thank you so much for the opportunity @npub1zu5…qtgz Max and all the BHB team

2024-08-26 17:17:37

- reply

Appreciate that! Also thought it really hit the point

2024-08-23 10:46:55

The quality of people in the Nostr space is pretty mindblowing to me as a mere Bitcoin pleb.
We're going to get so sick of winning

2024-08-22 13:54:06

Ark is coming 👀
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/tim-draper-invests-in-ark-labs-to-make-bitcoin-payments-easier

2024-08-14 19:24:00

- reply

>utxo ownership proofs
feels limiting, most people aren't likely to own utxos in the first place

2024-08-14 17:11:35

- reply

I completely agree with everything you've just said but let's just not errr on using terms like unilateral exit when they have a very well defined intent which doesn't apply here.

2024-08-14 15:40:10

- reply

The mint running away with the collateral

2024-08-14 14:29:14

- reply

Hmm this is cool but it doesn't address the actual custodial risk typically associated with ecash.

2024-08-14 13:58:25

- reply

Can you expend on this?
By custodian do you mean the mint or wherever you are storing your nsac?

2024-08-11 23:43:13

- reply

Wow!

2024-08-09 18:27:09

- reply

Try Bitkey 😉

2024-08-09 17:07:41

- reply

cool story bro

2024-08-09 17:02:22

- reply

Reads note.
Check profile.
Sees XMR.
Ignores.

2024-08-09 16:43:51

Bitcoiners are going to have a hard time, get scammed, repeatedly deceived and go into depression until they are ready to admit that 99% of retail payments will not go through self-custodial UTXOs.
You don't and can't get around L1 economics.

2024-08-09 16:43:46

- reply

I was in the dragonsden fighting in the trenches at Bitcoin's most critical moment? Where were you?
I have done my fair share of Bitcoin "recruiting". Most of the time it's a total waste of time.
People will come to Bitcoin as they need it. Same for Nostr

2024-08-09 16:14:34

- reply

The UX problems with Nostr clients are front and center and very apparent in contrast with centralized solutions.
We know that the current state of key management is unsustainable for larger audiences. There seems to be promising progress in that regard.
I do agree that waves of adoption stimulate innovation but "recruiting" people to Nostr feels like "recruiting" people to Bitcoin. It's a pretty perilous endeavour.

2024-08-09 15:44:20

- reply

The infrastructure is still lacking in MANY respect, rushing to onboard people who aren't ready for it will leave them struggling through a subpar experience and more likely than not give up on Nostr. Good luck getting them to come back after this.
Nostr is just like Bitcoin, people are going to flock to it in cycle but it's probably for the best that we don't have a "breakout moment" right now.

2024-08-09 00:17:33

- reply

yeah let's support an administration that put up a literal retard as candidate to replace a senile president they tried to hide from the constituents for the last 4 years

2024-08-09 00:13:40

- reply

fiat banks consolidate because regulations make creating fiat banks prohibitive

2024-08-09 00:12:24

- reply

So then in your world anyone you disagree with can stale Bitcoin development by being very loud and supportive towards any potential change
I hope you realize what a silly outcome that would be

2024-08-08 21:07:48

- reply

if you want to move spam off the network you should support OP_CAT

2024-08-08 19:19:38

- reply

It does not make shitcoining any easier.
It allows any Bitcoin users to set spending restrictions on their bitcoins. If you have an issue with how other people might use their bitcoins that's a you problem not a Bitcoin problem.
Any feature that makes Bitcoin better by default makes the life of anyone who use it better. Would we want to remove multisig because it makes shitcoining on Bitcoin easier?
Meanwhile you can use those new spending conditions to create a vault with reactive security for your savings, or your ecash mint.
Or build more capital efficient ARKs to further improve liquidity for Lightning Service Providers.

2024-08-08 19:10:52

- reply

People are already shitcoining on Bitcoin and it will never stop.
OP_CAT allows you to build covenants and perhaps ways for the shitcoiners to have fun while not hurting every other Bitcoin users.
On top of that, Bitcoin users interested in self-custody and payments alone would benefit from having covenants available.
Win win

2024-08-06 21:01:49

- reply

No that’s the thing. You have very little optionality in today’s system. Everything is hyper consolidated. Barriers to entry are prohibitively high. Innovation is repressed. Network effects are captured into oligopolies.
Lightning is the bridge to permissionless finance.

2024-08-06 19:24:11

- reply

You can decide which of the hundreds of thousands of financial services built on it you will use.

2024-08-06 19:16:51

- reply

Lightning creates a level playing ground for every financial service on the planet.
It is far and away the future for Bitcoin regardless of how people decide to use it. Custodial or not.

2024-08-06 17:00:35

Over the last year Lightning, has been integrated into
- Largest exchange in world (Binance)
- Largest exchange in USA (Coinbase)
- Largest exchange in Mexico (Bitso)
- Largest exchange in SEA (Coinsph)
- Largest fintech bank in South America (Nubank)
but there are still people out there fading it.

2024-08-06 14:13:51

- reply

They don't owe you shit

2024-08-06 13:47:25

- reply

What have you done for them that you think you are entitled to anything more than what they've disclosed in their article?
Did you donate?

2024-08-05 21:23:44

- reply

But it's just not the case.
It's much harder to securely generate a private key and back it up than it is to open an online account I don't know what you're talking about.

2024-08-05 20:21:54

- reply

>In the western world if you can figure out how to open a bank account, you can learn how to self custody #Bitcoin
Lol no. To open a bank account you:
1. pay someone to do it for you
2. trust them to manage it.
In either case you don't have much liability at all or room to fuck up because a professional is paid to do all the work and you can sleep safe knowing you can sue them if they lose your money (or ask to rewrite the fiat chain).
Self custody requires responsibility and vigilance.

2024-08-05 02:14:22

- reply

must suck living in your little bubble of a world

2024-08-04 20:48:28

- reply

If you're okay with paying the costs of self custody then Phoenix and others launched soon should be able to do Lightning pretty seamlessly.

2024-08-04 17:24:34

- reply

yes better hold your keys and go broke holding an asset heading for zero

2024-08-04 17:11:41

- reply

if the goal is poverty yes