1/ We have switched https://t.co/Kr32V1LViq from #btc testnet to mainnet, being one of the first to conduct real #btc transactions on #internetcomputer, as well as one of the first to conduct private #btc transactions!

Very creative indeed!

Calling out to everyone who felt stuck with the vetKey development, please help fill out this survey!

@domiwoe @JanCamenisch @VictorShoup

Yes we agree with all these, but where is the promised VetKey? It is THE MOST UNIQUE feature no other chain has, will enable *encryption* besides *signing signature*. And yet, not much seems to be happening since the initial paper last May. becoming increasingly frustrating 😡

https://t.co/N5Egq7z1kk v2 (beta) has been running steadily for over a year and half, and many people have transacted both ICP and BTC with it. We are happy to continue supporting the service! In the meantime, we will retire v1, which has not seen any usage since v2 was launched

It is that time again 😁 We have evaluated NNS Proposal #123252 submitted by @hotornot_dapp for creating an SNS DAO and issuing $HOT tokens. Full report 👇👇 https://t.co/onulkEdtXU Needless to say, pls DYOR #ICPeople

We have evaluated NNS Proposal #122749 submitted by @kinic_app for creating an SNS DAO and issuing $KINIC tokens. Full report 👇👇👇 https://t.co/82yRnoX8NW It is but one opinion. As always, pls DYOR #ICPeople

We have evaluated NNS Proposal #122343 submitted by @sonic_ooo for creating an SNS DAO and issuing $SOC tokens. Full report 👇👇👇 https://t.co/Ns8COnkY4b It is but one opinion. As always, pls DYOR #ICPeople

9/ TLDR; we propose the following rule of thumb: NNS should never be used to mingle with applications other than those created by NNS. If you agree, please vote NO on proposal 115067. If you don't agree, happy to discuss!

8/ Any one can propose, but voters, especially named neurons, should have clear guiding principles on how they vote. Otherwise it becomes a slippery slope (as if we have not had enough of those😡)

7/ If proposal 115067 passes, it sets a precedence that NNS can be used to change ANY application settings (including their controllers/code/state/everything). This is a very dangerous precedence because there is no clear rule on what kind of change is appropriate and acceptable

6/ Note that this multi-domain & custom-domain feature already exists in II, had @TaggrNetwork set it up previously, it wouldn't be an incident as devastating as it is now

5/ For example, if taggr can create a new canister and restore from a backup, then II (which is an application) can step in to help set a special rule on custom domains so that previous logins continue to work with the new canister.

4/ Proposal 115067 laid out some good reasons, but we think they only explained why taggr canister is valuable and worth rescuing, but NOT WHY IT MUST BE RESCUED BY NNS.

3/ We sympathize with what happened with @TaggrNetwork . There are many things that could have been done to prevent the incident from happening. But since it already happened, question is, shall we utilize NNS to rescue an application canister?

2/ Just to throw out a simple rule: NNS should never be used to mingle with applications other than those created by NNS. Don't agree? We challenge you to come up with an alternative rule that is as actionable, as clear cut, and simpler to follow.

1/ Calling all votes and named neurons, please vote NO on proposal https://t.co/jzordLToQu @ICDevs_org @BobBodily @sayitkind @8YearGangDAO @ArthurFalls @AI_ccp251th @py @crypto_is_good @icpleague_com If passed, it threatens the very principal of governance Find out why 👇👇👇

Should https://t.co/3Nyx7A2iNg support private transactions for ckBTC?

11/ *Correction* It actually charges 0.00001 BTC flat fee for private transfers as a DoS protection. We could go lower should BTC price rise 😁 Also, if you send to public address, it has to be p2pkh for now. Support for p2sh & p2wpkh will come later.

Congrats! You nailed it!