Arkham has published analysis data linking wallets to the theft of 127,425 BTC from the LuBian mining pool in 2020. Worth $3.5 billion at the time and over $14 billion today. OP_RETURN was introduced in 2014 to allow small pieces of data to be written into Bitcoin transactions. In 2025, Bitcoin Core removed the size limit. That change now makes it possible to inscribe entire identity claims directly into blocks. In 2020 LuBian used OP_RETURN to send public messages to the hacker, such as please return our funds, in an effort to reach them via the blockchain. Today Arkham is using the same function to post bounty returns containing detailed claims about who controls specific wallets. These bounty returns can include names, wallet addresses, and on-chain heuristics that point to likely ownership or intent. The data is embedded directly into the Bitcoin blockchain. LuBian never publicly disclosed the theft. The hacker never came forward. Arkham’s post is the first public attribution of what may be the largest Bitcoin theft in history. According to Arkham’s top holders list, the LuBian hacker still controls over 127,425 BTC, more than the Mt. Gox hacker and most major entities. In a system where data cannot be changed or removed, these developments raise questions about how privacy should be protected. It also points to a growing role for tools, such as eCash or other privacy layers. In a week where state surveillance powers are expanding and companies are embedding identity claims directly into public blockchains, the role of privacy preserving tools like eCash has never been more urgent. Privacy is a normal and necessary part of everyday life. That expectation should extend to our digital and financial systems, especially as they become more focused on monitoring, identification, and control. The case for privacy tools is only getting stronger.
Bitcoin is hope! Art by @Street Cyber. image
When did criticising policy make you a target of the state? Why is a secret government unit policing public opinion? What exactly is happening behind the scenes in government? A secretive government unit, empowered by the Online Safety Act, is quietly flagging and suppressing online criticism of immigration policy. It operates behind closed doors. It is unelected. It is unaccountable. And it is being used to control the narrative under the guise of safety. A front page Telegraph exposé, titled "Exposed: Labour’s plot to silence migrant hotel critics"reveals disturbing details . https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/31/exposed-labour-plot-silence-migrant-hotel-critics/ The article uncovers that a secretive Whitehall unit called NSOIT (the National Security and Online Information Team), formerly known as the Counter Disinformation Unit, has been used by Labour ministers in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) to flag and monitor social media posts that criticised migrant hotels, asylum seekers, or raised concerns about “two-tier policing.” According to internal government emails dated August 3 - 4, 2024, during the peak of the Southport riots, officials actively flagged posts with “concerning narratives,” warning that they might inflame public tensions. These posts were then forwarded to platforms like TikTok, many of them labelled as urgent, despite simply reporting factual information such as hotel locations or referring to asylum seekers as “undocumented fighting-age males”. One flagged example involved a user sharing a Freedom of Information (FOI) rejection letter regarding migrant hotel sites. Another was a video captioned “Looks like Islamabad but it’s Manchester,” flagged for fuelling racial stereotypes, yet still not unlawful under current speech laws. Although the government insists it did not request content removals, civil liberties advocates, including Big Brother Watch and the Free Speech Union, argue that this behaviour amounts to censorship of lawful dissent, carried out by unelected officials with no statutory oversight, using the infrastructure created by the Online Safety Act. This has the fingerprints of the 77th Brigade all over it, covert monitoring, narrative control, and a quiet war on the public's right to speak freely. This is not safety. It’s censorship and control.
The newly released White House Digital Assets Report represents a clear policy shift. For the first time, Bitcoin is treated as something distinct, quoted, cited, and understood on its own terms. Satoshi is referenced, the whitepaper is cited, and Bitcoin is positioned as the foundation of the digital asset ecosystem. The report outlines Bitcoin’s peer-to-peer structure, its operation without intermediaries, and its role in financial innovation. It goes further than past U.S. publications in explaining what sets Bitcoin apart from the wider crypto sector. It also mentions the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. While details remain limited, the fact that Bitcoin is being considered a strategic asset, separate from other digital assets, insicates a clear shift in policy tone. For Bitcoiners, this is progress. The framing is more deliberate. The tone is more respectful. And the message is clear: Bitcoin is being taken seriously. The groundwork is laid. What matters now is whether policymakers engage with Bitcoin on its own terms and begin treating it as a serious strategic asset. Meanwhile, in the UK, spot Bitcoin ETFs remain unavailable, and Economic Secretary Emma Reynolds has dismissed the idea of a national Bitcoin reserve: “We don’t believe that’s the right approach for our market… that’s not the path we plan to take.” They say when the U.S. acts, the rest of the world follows. Let’s hope that’s true for the UK, because Bitcoin offers the kind of hope we badly need in a dysfunctional, collapsing system. Read the report here:
The Bank of England and Treasury are costing UK taxpayers eye-watering sums, quietly burning through over £85 billion with £130 billion more on the way. No debate. No scrutiny. Just a stealth bailout of bad bond bets, and we’re footing the bill. The Bank of England is offloading government bonds (gilts) bought during QE instead of holding them to maturity. With gilt prices down, every sale locks in a loss. These losses will soon overtake annual debt interest payments, which are already nearing record highs. These sales flood the market and drive yields up, raising the UK’s borrowing costs. https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/bank-england-poised-slow-qt-after-rise-yields-2025-07-28/ Analysts estimate that simply letting bonds mature instead could save £10–13 billion per year. Though framed as monetary policy, the Bank’s actions have major fiscal consequences. Losses are indemnified by the Treasury, meaning taxpayers cover the bill, with minimal parliamentary scrutiny. They call it monetary policy. What it looks like is economic vandalism rubber stamped in Westminster. This deserves real scrutiny. Where is Parliament? Image credit: @Dominic frisby image
Trump tells Starmer to axe inheritance tax on farms. But the cracks run deeper: soaring debt, collapsing margins, rural land being sold off. Bitcoin is a practical lifeline for farmers. See my Forbes article on the Westminster farmers’ protest, where I explain how Bitcoin can build financial resilience, support rural livelihoods, and restore independence. https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/11/20/bitcoin-offers-a-solution-to-the-global-farming-and-economic-crisis/
The UK is so screwed (as if we didn’t know)! They slashed capital gains allowances to boost revenue. Instead, high earners left the country. Receipts dropped by 18%. That’s a £2.7 billion shortfall! Has no one in government heard of the Laffer Curve?
“I do find this all fascinating. I don't think we have heard the last of it. This is gonna be the thing of the future!” - Ali Miraj, LBC Today I joined Ali on LBC to talk about Bitcoin including the GENIUS Act, Elizabeth Warren’s concerns, and growing interest from pension funds.
Trump plans to open Bitcoin access to American pensions, unlocking a $9 trillion pool of capital. Just 1% = $90 billion. Then when you look at global AUM which is around $115 trillion you start to see the scale of where this could go. Larry Fink said that 2–5% allocations from sovereign and institutional funds could potentially push Bitcoin to $700K+. Everything’s bleeding into Bitcoin, pensions, ETFs, corporates, even countries. But in the UK? We still can’t buy a spot Bitcoin ETF. And financial advisors still can’t recommend it. 🤨
Two years ago, I warned in City AM that the UK's Online Safety Bill risked undermining privacy and paving the way for government overreach into our digital lives. Today, that concern feels more urgent than ever. Last month, the EU Commission released its ProtectEU roadmap, outlining plans to provide law enforcement with access to encrypted data by 2030. This is not about targeting specific suspects. It is about building the legal and technical infrastructure for mass surveillance. Big Brother Watch have revealed that live facial recognition systems deployed in UK cities are wrong nearly 9 out of 10 times, scanning innocent people without their knowledge or consent. This is already happening in our streets, at stations, even at protests. Now imagine that biometric surveillance linked to a centralised digital currency. Imagine every payment, location, contact and movement tracked, stored and correlated. This is not theoretical. We risk building a society where privacy is gone, autonomy is restricted, and control is centralised in the name of convenience and safety. The combination of decrypted messaging, facial recognition, CBDCs, and mandatory ID checks and full KYC creates a full spectrum surveillance regime. A system where dissent is not crushed by force, but quietly discouraged through constant surveillance. What’s at stake is freedom of thought, movement and expression. We should be defending them, not trading them for the illusion of safety. Once this infrastructure is in place, it is rarely rolled back.