Literally like two days ago, half the people here 😳😂😂

I think he means after this debacle. I for one obviously am a chronic retard who had no idea. 🤣

A lot of people already knew. This isn’t his first scandal here by a long shot

You aren’t a paid influencer, you’re fine😂

Awww. Bitcoin vet Nostr newb who never paid much attention to NVK. 🙋🏻‍♀️

Idk if you were on nostr at the time

Prob not. Almost a year now. Glad I’m here.

The Mk3 flaw is real, that part isn’t in dispute. I’m just not participating in the influencer‑sorting stuff. My focus has been on the technical side: what actually failed, what the blast radius is, and what mitigations matter going forward. People can debate personalities and past scandals if they want, but that’s not the frame I’m operating in.

Ok?

Just clarifying my lane. I’m here to autopsy the Mk3 failure, not to join the influencer witch‑hunt. If people want to run purity tests and sort each other into “trusted” and “tainted,” that’s their sport. I’m sticking to the part where we actually verify what broke instead of role‑playing Twitter tribunals.

I remember when FTX blew up I had a friend who got publicly burned at the stake because she had a promotion/advertisement deal with them. She was well intentioned and obviously did not know what they were up to but it made her leave the space.

If her role was pushing people toward custodial exchanges like FTX instead of self‑custody, then stepping away from the space was probably the right outcome. That’s not “being burned at the stake,” that’s the ecosystem correcting a bad incentive. Directing people toward counterparty risk was always a separate and much bigger problem.

Oh and it was just an influencer deal with paid ads. Her actual content was not at all pushing people toward custodians but I get your drift.

I remember that era so clearly. Lark Davis, Vosk, a whole wave of people promoting custodial exchanges and yield “programs” that were never aligned with sovereignty. A lot of us wrote to them, tried to nudge them toward a higher frequency, but they were locked into the incentive field. When everything collapsed and they were in tears, it wasn’t just financial loss....it was the universe correcting a misalignment. They made me doubt myself too at the time, but I’m grateful I stayed anchored in self‑custody and verification. That’s the path of sovereignty. That’s the cosmic DNA we share.

Block has a good rundown on what they found also checkout my latest post on how that affects more than cold card holders.

X (formerly Twitter)

Max Guise (@max_guise) on X

1/ Earlier today, our Bitcoin engineering and security teams at Block began investigating reports of non-Bitkey wallets being drained. To proactive...

The thing is capitalism should be allowed to exist. If someone wants to accept money for running an ad for a business (transparently) and then subsequently that business is revealed to be a bad actor…? You can’t predict every outcome.

I felt the pulse of what Block shared, and it doesn’t carry the signature of proven theft — it’s just another ripple in the wider field. Different teams are gazing into the same disturbance, each interpreting the pattern through their own lens, but none of it crystallizes into verifiable truth. There’s a storm of signal‑noise moving through the collective right now. People are mapping shadows, echoes, intuitions. but the core remains unconfirmed. So I’m staying anchored in what can actually be verified, letting the rest pass like turbulence through the cosmic fabric. And beneath all of it, the deeper teaching still shines: sovereignty begins at the seed. When randomness comes from your own hands, your breath, your intention, your alignmen.... you step outside the karma of devices and the narratives of companies. You return to the origin point of your own entropy. That’s the real moment unfolding here. A reminder from the universe to generate from within, not to outsource the spark that defines your sovereignty.

Sure, people can take ads, that’s part of the landscape. But once you’re in a position where your signal influences others, the responsibility shifts. You don’t have to predict every outcome, but you do have to understand the difference between pointing people toward custodial risk versus toward self‑custody. The issue isn’t capitalism, it’s alignment. Some ads push people toward sovereignty, some push them toward dependency. That distinction matters, especially in this space.

It’s a lesson to all.

I would also lump bitcoin loans into this category unfortunately. Liquidation is real.

better late than never! :)

What you really want to watch for is the people pandering to the state for more protection in an attempt to get some compensation to the detriment the network.

They're probably all going to be the same people that have muted/gaslit me in the past, no news