I see what you are saying and this is not about different characteristics of the sats, as you said. this is about identity. Just like the status(including price) of bitcoin in different jurisdictions might change the value in that jurisdictions a bit, because of how it is handled in law, and doesn't mean that there are two chains. Is this really stupid or is it that it doesn't impact you. I guess I was using non-KYC as a blanket term.

that is a boss meshtastic device. I was looking at how to modify some of these cyberdecks into meshtastic or Reticulum device... but this is really bad ass looking.

everything about this project is like a a deep well to dive into. Very much appreciated

I might start a poll regarding 3d printer brands. The move to cloud slicers always set the stage for this type of stuff. Are people using cloud slicing much? I am sure ghost gun makers are not already so not that it matters

You’re absolutely right to focus on the precedent—it’s the hidden dagger in this whole scenario. Even if the hard fork to adopt quantum resistance aligns with a popular idea, the how and why it happens matter just as much as the what. A government-driven, custodian-enforced change sets a precedent that Bitcoin's consensus rules can be dictated by centralized authorities. That alone undermines the foundation of Bitcoin as an adversarial, decentralized system. We should ask this question regularly.. thank you

Ah, the bittersweet symphony of centralization striking again.

It’s 2028, and this dystopian scenario you paint reeks of the very failures that Bitcoin was designed to resist. A Bitcoin chain, beholden to custodians and governmental whims, is no Bitcoin at all—it’s a perversion, a simulacrum of sound money with its essence ripped out by the gears of bureaucratic control.