Simon Dixon says we’re now in the “Wall Street Attack Phase”, a period where traditional finance will do whatever it takes to get our bitcoin. The history of bitcoin has always been one of counterattacks, and this is just another chapter. Hal Finney imagined a future where banks would hold bitcoin as reserves and settle with each other using it, integrating rather than replacing the financial system. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t stay alert to how easily integration can become capture. In this podcast, Simon issues a series of serious warnings: - Many underestimate what Wall Street is willing to do to take your bitcoin. Everyone’s going to go through some really hard lessons in the coordinated, engineered process to teach people they should have bitcoin in self custody. - People come in for Number Go Up technology and until they go through a disaster, they don’t realise that money you can own and money you can spend is the real utility. - The true utility of bitcoin is self custody. - There’s a crucial distinction between bitcoin in custody, bitcoin in self custody, and everything else in crypto. If you don’t figure that out over the next five years, you’ll end up in a Universal Basic Income surveillance state, an Orwellian nightmare where you get the vaccine or you get negative interest rates. Which side of that are you going to be on? Simon predicts that anyone who does it through Wall Street via ETFs, pensions or bitcoin backed loans will see a repeat of 2021. They will live through another elaborate scheme that ends with your bitcoin in their wallets and under their control. We will live in a two tier bitcoin system with Wall Street instruments on one side and bitcoin in self custody on the other. Self custody is ultra ultra important for people to figure out. My takeaway: This @Simon Dixon podcast with @Bitcoin Archive could be one of the most important podcasts you listen to. Please don’t lose your way. Remember why bitcoin is special, it’s freedom money, not a Wall Street instrument. As Simon says, bitcoin is the opt out. It’s an exit from the system. Watch here:

The UK holds £5 billion in bitcoin, yet pushes digital IDs instead of considering a strategic bitcoin reserve. The divide isn’t left vs right, it’s freedom vs control. Read my latest Forbes article . https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2025/10/03/bitcoin-and-digital-id-show-the-uks-fight-over-freedom/

Harvard economist Matthew Ferranti has published a peer reviewed study showing that central banks preparing for sanctions risk should hold more than just gold. His model demonstrates that adding Bitcoin to reserves strengthens resilience when access to traditional assets is threatened. For the first time, a peer reviewed economics journal is treating Bitcoin as a credible reserve asset rather than speculation. What took them so long? A reminder that money can be weaponised, while Bitcoin remains neutral, borderless, and open to everyone. At the Financial Times Digital Asset Summit, the UK’s Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Emma Reynolds said Bitcoin “isn’t for us.” Ferranti’s study shows why the government must start researching Bitcoin’s role in reserves. This is the kind of research @Bitcoin Policy UK has consistently urged the Treasury and Parliament to conduct. Read the full paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261560625001688

Runaway US debt is on target to hit $40T by Christmas. In the UK, the Office for Budget Responsibility flags us as one of the most indebted advanced economies. As Reuters put it: “Britain’s economic problems are home-grown and a solution looks a long way off.” Inflation saves the state, Bitcoin saves you.

Office for Budget Responsibility

The UK’s fiscal position in international context - Office for Budget Responsibility

The UK’s fiscal position is increasingly vulnerable, by both historical and international standards. In this box, we considered the drivers of fi...

https://www.reuters.com/commentary/breakingviews/britains-economic-woes-are-sadly-home-grown-2025-09-05/

Is this how freedom ends in the UK? The UK’s latest “crypto AML rules” slash ownership disclosures from 25% to 10%, pulling more people into disclosure regimes and expanding banking surveillance.

Passle

UK drafts changes to Money Laundering Regulations

The UK Government has shared draft legislation amending the Money Laundering Regulations, including changes to cryptoasset regulation, customer due...

GOV.UK

The draft Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provision) Regulations 2025 - Policy note

These measures are framed as fighting crime. But similar rules in tradfi have existed for years and haven’t stopped fraud or money laundering. What they do create are honeypots of personal data, risks for law-abiding people, and deeper state oversight. This is about normalising authoritarian tools, not AML or safety. Decades of KYC and financial surveillance show how control creeps in rule by rule. That same authoritarian logic already governs speech, from the Online Safety Bill to Graham Linehan’s Heathrow detention over tweets. And now digital IDs are back on the table, linking finance, identity and turning everyday access into a system of control. Add in programmable money and street surveillance, and you have a panopticon, a 1984 scenario darker than Orwell imagined.

99Bitcoins

New UK Crypto AML Rules Target Ownership, Banking, and Trusts

The UK is updating its crypto AML rules with stricter checks on ownership, banking partners, and trust registration. Feedback open until Sept.

The UK has offically sleepwalked into authoritarianism.

Energy bills are climbing again in the UK while billions are being paid out in curtailment costs. Flexible load solutions that could help stabilise the grid are being ignored. According to the Financial Times, in the 2024–25 financial year. NESO spent £2.7 billion in total balancing costs in 2024–25, with wind curtailment a major contributor. This curtailment happened because the grid could not handle the excess electricity.

Client Challenge

Recent coverage paints a clear picture. YahooFinance and CoinDesk report on Hut 8’s efforts to monetise energy assets, showing how miners are aligning with the energy sector to provide stability and unlock new revenue streams.

Yahoo Finance

Hut 8 Maps

Benchmark analyst Mark Palmer hiked his Hut 8 price target to $36 from $33, while reiterating his buy rating on the stock.

https://coindesk.com/markets/2025/08/27/hut-8-maps-path-to-monetization-of-energy-assets-as-bitcoin-mining-carve-out-nears-benchmark Our UK briefing paper at @Bitcoin Policy UK shows exactly how Bitcoin mining could do the same here. Flexible load can absorb excess renewable generation, reduce curtailment costs, and lower bills for households and businesses. 📄.pdf The UK energy crisis is not going away. It is time to stop ignoring solutions that are already working elsewhere. H/t to Progressive Bitcoin UK for today’s newspaper headlines.

Another solo Bitcoin miner has hit a block, with #910,440 reportedly earning around $371,000 through CKpool. This adds to a series of rare solo wins seen in 2025. These stories show that solo miners have a chance to succeed and serve as a reminder that Bitcoin remains open to anyone, reflecting the ongoing promise of decentralised mining. Read the full article here:

CoinMarketCap Academy

Bitcoin Solo Miner Scores $371K Block Reward Against All Odds | CoinMarketCap

A solo Bitcoin miner has successfully mined block 910,440 through Solo CK pool, earning 3.137 BTC worth approximately $371,000.

BTCHEL in Helsinki was the first major Bitcoin event in the Nordics. Across the panels there were discussions on mining, decentralisation, regulation, energy, and the growing role of Nostr in building a censorship resistant future. Moments like this show the growing global momentum for Bitcoin as money, a network, a technology and a movement. Jeff Booth said the change that is happening now is so profound it can’t be measured in our current reality. One of the closing remarks by Knut on the future of Bitcoin summed it up best: “Let’s hope Bitcoin changes you more than you can change Bitcoin. Let’s hope that’s also true for politicians too.” BTCHEL will be back next year and I highly recommend it. ⚡️ Special thanks to Luke, Knut and the whole team for making BTCHEL such a huge success. @BTCHEL 2026 🇫🇮 @Roger 9000 @Rachel @Joe Nakamoto @Jeff Booth @Knut Svanholm ∞/21M @Luke de Wolf

If you like Bitcoin, beef, and mining… you’ll love this! Hashdried Proof of Beef Chris the Butcher from Helsinki knew nothing about Bitcoin and is now drying his beef using the heat from mining. Thank you, Chris, for showing how it’s done! @BTCHEL 2026 🇫🇮

The Financial Times published a piece this week titled “Why struggling companies are loading up on bitcoin.” At first glance it looks like a story about corporate adoption of the world’s leading digital asset. Read beyond the headline and a problem emerges. The article uses “Bitcoin” and “crypto” interchangeably, which gives the impression they are the same thing. The article includes high profile Bitcoin cases like MicroStrategy alongside firms acquiring other tokens such as Ether or Solana. It reports total figures for “crypto purchases” while presenting the trend as companies “loading up on bitcoin.” Warnings about systemic risk refer to companies holding crypto assets far above their revenues but do not distinguish between Bitcoin and other assets, which changes how the data can be interpreted. The difference matters because Bitcoin is not “crypto.” Bitcoin is a decentralised, fixed supply network with 16 years of uptime and a clear monetary policy. Crypto is a catch all for millions of tokens with very different levels of security, regulation, liquidity and purpose. A company adding bitcoin to its treasury as a long term reserve asset is not the same as one speculating on illiquid, high volatility altcoins. The risk profile, motives and signal to the market are different. When journalists blur these lines, the analysis loses its foundation. Readers are left with an oversimplified narrative that only holds together if Bitcoin and crypto are treated as one category. If an argument depends on merging those two worlds, it is not analysis. It is misdirection, and it is harmful. Many policymakers read mainstream articles like this, take the narrative at face value and form their views about bitcoin without consulting subject matter experts or reviewing primary data. This is how flawed coverage can end up influencing lawmaking. In 2018 the UK Treasury Select Committee’s report on “crypto-assets” grouped Bitcoin and altcoins into a single category, a framing that mirrored mainstream coverage at the time. That framing then became part of the political record and aligned with the concerns later cited by the FCA when it introduced a ban on crypto derivatives for retail investors. In the EU, early drafts of the MiCA legislation included language that would have effectively banned proof of work networks such as Bitcoin by subjecting them to strict environmental standards. These provisions reflected the narrative common in mainstream coverage at the time, which portrayed Bitcoin’s energy use without context. Media driven misconceptions about Bitcoin have already influenced regulation. If coverage like this continues to shape political understanding, the effort required to undo the damage will only grow, and Bitcoin will be regulated on fiction rather than fact, as it appears to have been so far. I am glad Bitcoin is getting attention from mainstream media, but not like this. Brandolini’s Law says it takes ten times the effort to correct misinformation as it does to produce it. If that pattern continues, the cost of fixing the damage will be enormous and the policy mistakes even more so. Read the full article:

Client Challenge