Bitcoin has matured out of the bear market. So what’s next? Tyler Evans breaks down the Fed, the bond market, JPMorgan naming Bitcoin its best-performing asset class, ETF flows flipping to strong accumulation, and why the U.S. midterms could be pivotal heading into 2027. At the end of the day, he says, Bitcoin will just do its thing.
Chapters: 00:00 Tyler Evans Joins Bitcoin Magazine TV 00:11 Is Bitcoin’s Pause Before the Next Move Up? 01:25 The Fed, Kevin Warsh and the Bond Market 03:20 Institutions Buy as Bitcoin Flows Into the U.S. 04:43 Bitcoin vs. the AI Trade 06:09 VanEck’s All-in-One ETF and Bitcoin’s Allocation Problem 07:55 AI Agents and Bitcoin 09:01 Making Bitcoin as Easy as Apple Pay 11:02 Strategy Shareholders Approve Daily Dividends for Stretch 12:33 A Bitcoin Treasury Company Loses Access to Its Bitcoin 13:38 Qualified Custodians and Counterparty Due Diligence 14:56 MSCI Pushes Bitcoin Treasury Companies Out of Its Indexes 15:56 How Bitcoin Treasury Models Can Evolve 16:32 Where Bitcoin Goes by the End of 2027 17:48 ETF Flows and Reclaiming the 50-Week Moving Average
This video is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investments in digital assets involve significant risk and may result in loss of capital. Both UTXO Management and BTC Inc., producer of BMTV, are owned by Nakamoto Inc. (NASDAQ: NAKA)
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
What happens to reserve assets when you’re not allowed to sell them? Doomberg argues that U.S. pressure on allies to hold their Treasuries changes the math for central banks, and that in a crisis “you sell what you can sell, not what you want to sell.” That explains gold’s short-term weakness since February 28th, but in the long run he sees it as wildly bullish for gold and Bitcoin as neutral reserve assets. He also shares why younger, hyper-online generations are more likely to choose Bitcoin.
Chapters: 00:00 Doomberg on the Fed, Kevin Warsh and the Midterm Elections 01:21 Will Trump Restart the War in Iran After the Midterms? 03:11 Houthi Refinery Strikes, $110 Brent and Prices at the Pump 05:03 What a Renewed U.S.–Iran Conflict Would Mean for Global Markets 09:21 Doomberg’s Bull Case: Peace Deals and a Post-Midterm Boom 11:00 How a Diesel Shortage Turns Into a Glut 13:27 Europe’s Energy Crisis, French Bonds and U.S. Treasuries 16:38 Will Germany Bail Out France? The Future of the EU 19:02 Gold vs. Bitcoin as Reserve Assets 24:54 Christine Lagarde’s Early Exit and ECB Politics
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Galaxy’s new research note opens with a blunt call: “We believe the bottom is in.” Alex Thorn breaks down the evidence, starting with the fact that regaining the 50-week moving average after 20+ weeks below it has never been followed by a new low. He explains why Bitcoin’s resilience around $80K matters and why he thinks it’s contrarian to say long Bitcoin right now.
Chapters: 00:00 Bitcoin at $81K After the Fed: Is the Bottom In? 00:38 Galaxy’s 50-Week Moving Average Signal 02:10 Bitcoin’s Resilience Around $80K Amid AI Fears 02:54 Light Positioning: “The Crowd Is Not Here” 04:17 13F Filings: Hedge Funds Out, Sovereigns and Wealth Managers In 06:15 Tokenization Hype, the Narrative Pendulum and the Basis Trade 10:06 Strategy’s Daily Dividends, Strive and Tonight’s Earnings Call 12:27 Why the AI Build-Out Is a Debasement Machine 16:11 U.S. Debt, Fiscal Dominance and Bitcoin as Digital Gold 19:21 AI Cyber Attacks, Hardware Wallets and Multisig
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
France is at 120% debt to GDP, and Alexandre Laizet says the problem isn’t the debt, it’s that the proceeds are spent and not invested. The Capital B executive explains why Europe’s debt crisis and monetary debasement make the case for Bitcoin, and why France’s capital markets are suited to a Bitcoin treasury strategy.
Chapters: 00:00 Capital B: Europe’s First Bitcoin Treasury Company 00:33 Why Europe Needs Bitcoin and France’s Capital Markets 02:35 France’s Debt, Moody’s Rating and Spent vs. Invested 04:49 Capital B’s Goal to Become Europe’s Most Capitalized Company 06:39 Strategy’s Dividends and Digital Credit in Europe 10:13 Perpetual Credit and Regulation in France and Europe 12:05 MSCI’s New Rules for Bitcoin Treasury Companies 14:07 How Capital B Grew Its Bitcoin Through the Bear Market 17:32 Why Credit Investors Are Looking at Bitcoin-Backed Credit 19:54 French Debt Pressure, Tax Advantages and Bitcoin Adoption
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Bitcoin per share is one of the most important metrics for evaluating a Bitcoin treasury company. It measures how much bitcoin is attributable to each common share. However, there are several ways to calculate this figure, and each method provides different information about the economics of owning the common stock.
Understanding these differences is essential for evaluating a company’s capital structure, measuring accretion, and determining the value attributable to common shareholders.
Raw Bitcoin Per Share
The simplest metric is raw Bitcoin Per Share (BPS).
BPS = Total Bitcoin Holdings / Common Shares Outstanding
This calculation divides the company’s bitcoin holdings by its existing common shares. It provides a straightforward measure of how much bitcoin is attributable to each currently outstanding share.
The primary limitation is its treatment of potential dilution. A company may have warrants, convertible debt, or convertible preferred stock that could eventually become common shares. Raw BPS only counts existing shares, so it provides an incomplete picture of the potential future share count.
Bitcoin Per Assumed Diluted Share
Bitcoin Per Assumed Diluted Share (BPADS) addresses this limitation by incorporating the shares that would exist if all potentially dilutive securities converted into common stock.
BPADS = Total Bitcoin Holdings / Assumed Diluted Shares Outstanding
Because the assumed diluted share count is greater than or equal to the existing share count, BPADS is always less than or equal to raw BPS.
This metric became widely cited beginning in 2024, particularly as Bitcoin treasury companies began using increasingly complex capital structures.
BPADS provides a more conservative view of bitcoin ownership by incorporating potential dilution from outstanding securities. It becomes especially relevant for companies with substantial convertible debt, warrants, or convertible preferred stock.
However, its assumption of full conversion can be overly conservative.
Warrants and convertible debt may never convert if the common stock price remains below their conversion or exercise prices. Perpetual convertible preferred stock may also remain outstanding indefinitely if investors prefer receiving the preferred dividend rather than converting into common equity.
Consequently, BPADS represents a fully diluted scenario rather than a forecast of the actual future share count.
Net Bitcoin Per Share
Both BPS and BPADS share another major limitation: they measure gross bitcoin holdings without accounting for senior claims on the company’s assets.
Common equity sits at the bottom of the capital structure. Debt holders and preferred shareholders generally have priority over common shareholders according to their contractual rights.
These senior claims matter because they reduce the assets ultimately attributable to common equity.
Net Bitcoin Per Share (Net BPS) addresses this by deducting the bitcoin equivalent of senior claims from total bitcoin holdings before dividing by the common share count.
The basic calculation is:
Net BPS = (Total Bitcoin Holdings − Senior Claims / Bitcoin Price) / Common Shares
For example, a company with $1 billion in senior claims and a bitcoin price of $100,000 would need the equivalent of 10,000 bitcoin to satisfy those claims.
Those 10,000 bitcoin would therefore be deducted from gross bitcoin holdings when calculating Net BPS.
The denominator can use either existing common shares or an assumed diluted share count. However, the treatment must remain consistent: securities assumed to convert into common stock should have their extinguished senior claims removed from the numerator’s deductions. This avoids counting the same obligation twice.
Should cash be included?
There are two useful approaches to calculating Net BPS.
The first applies cash and cash equivalents against senior claims before deducting the remaining obligations from bitcoin holdings.
Net BPS = [Bitcoin Holdings − (Senior Claims − Applied Cash) / Bitcoin Price] / Common Shares
Here, applied cash is limited to the amount available to offset senior claims. This method reflects the fact that cash can satisfy obligations, preserving more bitcoin for common shareholders. This is the methodology used by Strategy to compute their mNAV.
The second approach deducts the full value of senior claims from bitcoin holdings and reports cash separately. For example, investors could examine both Net BPS and Cash Per Share. This separation provides a clearer view of the company’s bitcoin exposure alongside its independent cash reserves, at a per-share level.
Both approaches are useful. Including cash produces a more comprehensive measure of residual asset value, while excluding cash makes the company’s bitcoin and cash positions separately visible.
Net BPS changes with bitcoin’s price
A defining characteristic of Net BPS is its sensitivity to the price of bitcoin.
Raw BPS and BPADS depend on bitcoin holdings and share counts. Net BPS additionally depends on bitcoin’s market price because senior claims are generally denominated in dollars.
As bitcoin appreciates, fewer bitcoins are required to cover a fixed dollar obligation, so more bitcoins remain attributable to common shareholders. When bitcoin depreciates, the opposite occurs.
Net BPS therefore rises with bitcoin’s price and falls when bitcoin’s price declines, assuming fixed senior claims, holdings, and share counts.
This relationship creates both a challenge and an important advantage.
Challenge: Measuring accretion correctly
The challenge is that changes in Net BPS over time combine the effects of corporate actions with changes in bitcoin’s market price.
A rising bitcoin price can increase Net BPS even when a company’s financing decisions destroy value for common shareholders. Conversely, falling bitcoin prices can obscure the benefits of genuinely accretive transactions.
This makes directly comparing observed Net BPS figures across different dates an unreliable method of evaluating management’s capital allocation decisions.
However, raw BPS and BPADS are also inadequate measures of economic accretion.
Consider a company issuing debt to purchase bitcoin. Any positive amount of bitcoin purchased with debt increases raw BPS because bitcoin holdings rise while common shares remain unchanged. This holds regardless of the debt’s interest rate or repayment obligations.
Similarly, issuing preferred stock to purchase bitcoin increases raw BPS even if the preferred stock is issued at a substantial discount to par and carries expensive dividend obligations.
These transactions increase gross bitcoin ownership per common share while potentially reducing the residual value attributable to common shareholders.
The proper way to measure economic accretion is to compare Net BPS before and after a transaction while holding the bitcoin price constant.
This isolates the effects of changes in bitcoin holdings, senior claims, cash, and share count.
It reveals whether a corporate action genuinely increases the bitcoin equivalent of the residual assets attributable to each common share.
Advantage: Net BPS as a measure of common equity liquidation value
Perhaps the greatest advantage of Net BPS is its connection to the economic value of common equity. When bitcoin is a company’s primary treasury asset, Net BPS calculated with the appropriate cash adjustment approximates the bitcoin denominated liquidation value attributable to each common share.
(Note: by liquidation value, I mean the value that common stockholders would be entitled to if they liquidated the company, paid off all the claims, and divided the remainder amongst themselves. This has nothing to do with the “liquidation value” associated with leveraged, margin-callable trading positions. Actual recoveries in a real liquidation depend on the precise terms of senior securities, other assets and liabilities, liquidation expenses, and the taxable proceeds realized from asset sales.)
Multiplying Net BPS by the bitcoin price converts this amount into dollars. Investors can then compare that dollar figure with the common stock’s market price to measure the premium or discount at which the shares trade relative to their estimated residual asset value.
This is an advantage that BPS and BPADS cannot offer. Because Net BPS accounts for senior claims, it provides a more direct measure of the assets that ultimately belong to common shareholders, making it the most relevant basis for comparison with the common stock’s market price.
This connection to common equity liquidation value also explains why accretion is best measured through changes in Net BPS at a constant bitcoin price. Holding the price constant isolates the impact of corporate actions on the residual asset value attributable to each common share. And because Net BPS factors in both senior claims and common stock, it accounts for the impact of all possible corporate actions that involve issuance or repurchase of securities interests, while projecting the results of the impact onto the common stock.
Conclusion
Each Bitcoin per share metric serves a distinct purpose.
Raw BPS measures gross bitcoin holdings attributable to existing common shares. BPADS incorporates potential dilution. Net BPS accounts for senior claims and measures the residual bitcoin value attributable to common equity.
For evaluating the capital stack, Net BPS is the most comprehensive of the three. Holding bitcoin’s price constant allows investors to isolate the economic effects of financing transactions and assess genuine accretion. Net BPS provides a direct connection between the company’s balance sheet and the market value of its common stock.
Disclaimer:This content was prepared on behalf ofBitcoin For Corporationsfor informational purposes only. It reflects the author’s own analysis and opinion and should not be relied upon as investment advice. Nothing in this article constitutes an offer, invitation, or solicitation to purchase, sell, or subscribe for any security or financial product.
A mosaic is an artwork assembled from fragments. From ancient Roman floors to Byzantine churches, artists have used pieces of stone, glass, and ceramic to construct images that have endured for centuries.
For the generative artist known as BitArt, those fragments are satoshis (or sats), the smallest units of bitcoin.
In Mosaic, a continuously evolving artwork developed through the Bitcoin Art Society (BAS), the numerical properties of satoshis are translated into color and spatial coordinates. Each contribution adds to an expanding composition of pixels resembling digital textiles, early computer graphics, or abstract paintings.
Rather than illustrating bitcoin through familiar iconography, Mosaic treats the network itself as artistic material. Satoshi positions and unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) become inputs for a rule-based system that determines the artwork’s appearance. BitArt begins with bitcoin’s underlying data and allows an image to emerge.
The approach recalls conceptual artist Sol LeWitt’s proposition that an artwork can exist as a set of instructions rather than a singular handcrafted object. Generative artists such as Vera Molnár and Manfred Mohr similarly explored how mathematical systems and computational procedures could produce visual compositions. Mosaic extends this tradition into an economic network shaped by transactions and human decisions.
The scale is extraordinary. According to BitArt, Mosaic now contains more than 127 million tiles and one billion layers. Viewing every layer at a rate of one per second would take over 30 years.
The Mosaic (detail), BitArt (2026)
The project has also expanded into sound. Its musical component draws from the same satoshi data that generates the imagery, translating numerical values into an evolving score. Together, these elements create an audiovisual artwork shaped by bitcoin’s underlying structure and the contributions of its participants.
These experiments form part of the broader ambitions of Bitcoin Art Society, founded by Serge Ajamian and Yara Al Chammaa to support the creation, exhibition, and preservation of digital art on bitcoin.
For Al Chammaa, preservation is particularly personal. Following the 2020 Beirut Port explosion, which destroyed much of the artwork housed in her family’s gallery, she began reconsidering how cultural heritage might survive physical destruction. That experience helped inform BAS’s interest in bitcoin as a potential medium for preserving cultural works beyond the vulnerabilities of physical institutions.
BAS has since presented bitcoin-native digital art internationally, including Mosaic accompanied by live musicians at the Galileo Galilei Planetarium in Buenos Aires. Its inaugural artist residency features BitArt and CyberSea, whose practices investigate generative systems and blockchain-native artistic production.
Yet permanence raises questions beyond the durability of bitcoin’s ledger. Software-based art has long challenged museums to preserve not only underlying materials but also the technologies and experiences through which artworks are encountered. For Mosaic, what constitutes the artwork: the code, the rendered image, the accumulated contributions, or the experience of navigating the system?
At Bitcoin Amsterdam 2026, Mosaic will be presented on the conference’s main-stage LED installation, bringing its intricate visual structures to an architectural scale, similar to BAS’s immersive presentation at the Galileo Galilei Planetarium in Buenos Aires.
Ahead of the event, I spoke with BitArt about the project’s artistic origins, collective authorship, and the possibility of preserving an artwork that may never be finished.
Ordinals Buenos Aires presented by Bitcoin Art Society, immersive projection featuring BitArt (2025)
BMAG: You’ve described bitcoin as a time-based transactional medium rather than simply a platform for displaying art. What first led you to recognize its underlying mathematical and economic structures as artistic material, and how did that thinking develop into Mosaic?
BitArt: Bitcoin records the movement of value through a sequence of events secured by computational work, creating a history that becomes increasingly difficult to reverse. What interests me is not just the individual event, but the sequence of events that led to it. In the context of art, this shifts the question from “What is the artwork?” to “What had to happen for the artwork to become what it is?”
With the advent of the Ordinals protocol, it became possible to assign a unique number to every satoshi. This opened up new possibilities.
From there, Mosaic developed almost naturally. I only had to highlight what was already there. Once every satoshi has an assigned ordinal number, it becomes relatively straightforward to determine its position and derive its color or musical parameters through a set of rules.
The interesting part is that these structures emerge from a system driven by human decisions, rather than one designed to produce art.
The Mosaic (detail), BitArt (2026)
BMAG: Artists from Sol LeWitt to Vera Molnár have explored how predetermined rules can produce unexpected visual outcomes. In Mosaic, how do your decisions shape the system, and where does bitcoin’s underlying data take over?
BitArt: In a sense, Mosaic continues the tradition of rule-based art explored by LeWitt and Molnár, and builds on the concept of protocol art explored by Holly Herndon and Mat Dryhurst. But it introduces yet another layer: the input is the accumulated result of human decisions within an economic system.
My artistic decisions determine the rules of interpretation, but the underlying data determines the resulting visual and sonic structures.
The rules are deterministic, but the results are not necessarily predictable in practice. I find that tension particularly interesting. The artist creates the conditions under which something can emerge, rather than specifying what it should look or sound like.
BMAG: Participants contribute to Mosaic through their own transactions, becoming part of a composition that no single person controls. Does that make them collectors, collaborators, or something else?
BitArt: I think of authorship as something distributed across several layers.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect is that individual intentions can generate collective structures that nobody intended. Everyone contributes something specific, but the larger composition belongs to the system as a whole.
A participant can be a collector, but also becomes a contributor to the artwork’s evolving structure. The distinction between collecting and creating becomes less clear. Each contribution changes the work, but nobody, including myself, controls the resulting composition.
Authorship becomes less about controlling an outcome and more about establishing the conditions under which it can emerge.
Conceptual visualizations of artwork communication and collaboration in gallery settings, BitArt (2026)
BMAG: You’re developing a system for the upcoming Postmasters exhibition that will allow visitors to speak directly with artworks and receive responses. How does this differ from participating in Mosaic through bitcoin transactions? Are these different forms of communication through computational systems?
BitArt: Yes, both are intentional acts mediated by computational systems, but there is an important semantic distinction.
A contribution to Mosaic through a Bitcoin transaction is a non-verbal gesture that becomes part of a verifiable record. We can establish exactly what happened and how it changed the artwork. The action leaves a trace that the system can process directly.
Speaking to an artwork is different. Natural language must first be interpreted and translated into the formal language the artworks use to communicate.
In the first case, the action produces a verifiable change in the artwork’s state. In the second, it initiates a process of interpretation.
Both are expressions of human intention, but one establishes a computational fact, while the other opens up a space for interpretation.
Ordinals Buenos Aires presented by Bitcoin Art Society, immersive projection featuring BitArt (2025)
BMAG: You’ve written about the creative uncertainty that emerges during programming and experimented with the relationship between real time and bitcoin’s block time. How important are unpredictability, chance, and duration to your practice? Has Mosaic produced results that surprised you or challenged your original intentions?
BitArt: I designed the algorithm for Mosaic to be as simple as possible. It’s deterministic, so its results are technically predictable and reproducible. From a technical standpoint, there shouldn’t be any surprises. Nonetheless, the results are full of unexpected and surprising elements.
I think there is an important distinction between something being computationally predictable and our ability to anticipate or comprehend its results.
Currently, Mosaic contains over 127 million tiles and over 1 billion layers. To view all the layers at a rate of one layer per second would take over 30 years. There are many things that have surprised me, and I’m still discovering new ones.
The temporal divergence between real time and Bitcoin’s block time is also interesting to me. Bitcoin evolves according to its own rhythm, independently of how and when we observe it. This introduces another dimension of duration into the artwork.
The Mosaic (detail), BitArt (2026)
BMAG: The introduction of sound adds another dimension to Mosaic, with musical compositions generated from the same data that determines the visual structure. What can sound reveal about the underlying system that an image cannot?
BitArt: From the very beginning, Mosaic was built on three fundamental ideas.
The first is the possibility of capturing traces of human intention within a financial, algorithmic system and revealing visual and sonic structures from them.
The second is the development of a formal system in which Mosaic becomes meta-aware, in the sense of being self-referential and introspective, and capable of communicating and collaborating with other artworks.
The third is collective creation. Anyone can contribute to Mosaic and become part of its evolving structure.
Looking at Mosaic from any of these perspectives reveals something different about it. In the case of sound, it reveals melodic, harmonic, contrapuntal, and rhythmic structures that aren’t necessarily apparent in the visual representation.
Yet within the digital realm, the structures underlying the image and the music are closely related, sometimes almost identical. Perhaps the way we think about visual, sonic, and programmatic structures as separate domains is itself a limitation.
Ordinals Buenos Aires presented by Bitcoin Art Society, immersive projection featuring BitArt (2025)
BMAG: Your practice has been presented in contexts including the Whitney, ZKM, and ICC Tokyo, institutions with significant histories in digital and media art. Where do you see Mosaic within the broader history of generative and systems-based art? What does working directly with bitcoin make possible that earlier computational media did not?
BitArt: I see Mosaic as part of the tradition of generative and systems-based art, but I’m particularly interested in extending that tradition beyond the generation of images and sound.
I’m currently working on a show at Postmasters gallery in New York City in collaboration with BAS. The show will present Mosaic in communication and collaboration with other artworks.
In principle, any artwork that can be represented digitally can join the conversation, whether it’s Leonardo’s Mona Lisa, Malevich’s Black Square, an artwork inscribed on Bitcoin, or music as diverse as traditional folk songs, Nine Inch Nails’ 34 Ghosts IV, and Ravel’s Boléro.
Through the system I mentioned earlier, these artworks can reference themselves and one another, exchange statements, and initiate collaborations using a machine-readable formal language. What’s particularly interesting is that the audience will also be able to join these conversations by speaking directly with the artworks in natural language.
Historically, discourse about art happened outside the works themselves, in texts, institutions, discussions, and criticism. Artworks remained largely silent objects of interpretation. By giving artworks the formal means to reference one another, reason about themselves and others, and exchange verifiable statements, the project treats discourse itself as artistic material.
Art history normally describes influence retrospectively. Here, through collaborations between artworks, influence becomes operative. Influence becomes something artworks can perform.
Bitcoin introduces another dimension by providing a shared, ordered, and verifiable record of these exchanges and the artworks’ histories of collaboration. Unlike a conventional computational environment, this record can exist independently of any single artist, institution, or platform.
The artwork is no longer simply the result of a process or the process itself. It becomes a participant in an ongoing process of interpretation, communication, and creation.
The Mosaic (detail), BitArt (2026)
BMAG:Mosaic has already been presented in immersive environments, including the Galileo Galilei Planetarium in Buenos Aires. For Bitcoin Amsterdam, the work will be adapted for large-scale main-stage LED screens. How does that change the way audiences encounter the work, particularly when its original form is interactive and continuously evolving?
BitArt: The surface of the artwork is not fixed, and it is not what constitutes the artwork. It’s a manifestation of its state at any given time.
I like BAS’s approach of presenting it in intimate settings, large-scale immersive environments, and anywhere in between. Each setting allows the audience to experience a different aspect of the same underlying system.
In an interactive environment, the viewer navigates Mosaic individually, while on large-scale screens, the experience becomes collective. The audience encounters the artwork as it unfolds, rather than exploring it directly.
For the Postmasters show, I’m also developing a physical component that will provide yet another way of experiencing Mosaic.
What interests me is that the artwork can take on very different forms without changing its underlying identity. The presentation changes, but the system that constitutes the work remains the same.
Exhibition & Further Reading
Explore BitArt’s evolving Mosaic project through Bitcoin Art Society, learn more about its exhibitions and artist residencies, and follow BAS on X.
BAS will also present Art on Bitcoin: BAS Night at WiHH Gallery (What Is Happening Here) in Amsterdam on November 6, from 8–11 PM. Hosted in collaboration with Bitcoin Amsterdam, the evening brings together artists, collectors, and the bitcoin community for an exhibition and reception featuring food, music, and conversation. RSVP here.
The Bitcoin Museum & Art Gallery (BMAG) organizes international exhibitions, auctions, and artist collaborations exploring bitcoin and its cultural implications.
BitArt’s Mosaic will be featured on the main-stage LED screens at Bitcoin Amsterdam, November 5–6, 2026, as part of BMAG’s programming. Join us in Amsterdam and use code BA26-BMAG20 for discounted admission. Get your tickets here.
Senator Bill Hagerty says the only answer some in Congress have is a central bank digital currency, and that’s “absolutely not consistent with freedom and liberty.” In this in-studio interview, he explains how uncertainty let former SEC chair Gary Gensler attack the industry, why a light government touch helps innovation thrive, and what Congress can realistically get done before the new session in January.
Chapters: 00:00 Senator Bill Hagerty on What’s Next for the Clarity Act 01:38 Democrats, Ethics Provisions and the Stablecoin Rewards Debate 03:04 How the SEC and CFTC Are Regulating Crypto Without Congress 04:43 How the GENIUS Act Will Change Payments and Settlement 07:08 Stablecoins, Treasury Demand and U.S. Dollar Dominance 08:31 The U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and 200,000 Bitcoin 10:54 Why Americans Are Still Skeptical of Crypto 13:18 Bitcoin Mining, TVA and Tennessee’s Energy Buildout 17:14 Bitcoin Businesses in Nashville and Why CBDCs Threaten Freedom 18:36 What Congress Can Pass Before the New Session in January
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
AI hardware is sold out, and the companies that cut their teeth in Bitcoin mining are moving in. Luxor just raised $16 million in a round led by CMT Digital to scale its cloud platform, GPU hardware business and compute trading. Ethan Vera of Luxor and Sam Hallene of CMT Digital join BMTV to explain why Bitcoin mining expertise translates so well into AI compute.
Chapters: 00:00 Luxor Raises $16M to Take Bitcoin Mining Expertise Into AI 01:17 Why CMT Digital Backed the Luxor Team 02:54 What Bitcoin Mining Teaches AI Infrastructure 03:48 Luxor Cloud: Runners, Sandboxes and Code Review 04:51 Sandboxes for AI Agents 05:43 GPU Demand: Nvidia Sold Out for the Year 07:12 Compute Derivatives and Liquidity for AI Markets 08:12 Luxor’s Full-Stack Compute Ecosystem 10:24 Why Luxor Chose Strategic Investors 12:08 Bitcoin Mining Is Still a Core Pillar
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
“We believe the bottom is in.” That’s the call from Galaxy’s head of firmwide research, Alex Thorn. Bitcoin closed back above its 50-week moving average the week of September 20 and has kept that trend, and Galaxy notes that the four prior reclaims after 20-plus weeks below never closed more than 8.4% under the reclaim level in the following year. Here’s why the whole call comes down to the 50-week moving average.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
A CEO whose company holds Bitcoin as its primary treasury reserve says he hates the term “Bitcoin treasury company,” and that the market is rejecting every pure treasury play except Strategy. Patrick Lowry of Samara Asset Group joins Grace Remington and Sean Hagan to explain why “digital gold” was “stupid marketing” that turned Bitcoin into an investment instead of money, and why that framing is exactly why Bitcoin dips every time the Fed talks about hiking. He lays out how Samara uses Bitcoin as working capital instead, parking venture fund commitments in it and liquidating on capital calls regardless of price.
Chapters: 0:00 “I Hate the Term Bitcoin Treasury Company”: The Market Is Rejecting Pure Plays 1:05 Why “Digital Gold” Was Stupid Marketing That Made Bitcoin an Investment 2:13 Hold vs. Use: How Samara Runs Bitcoin as Working Capital for 20+ Funds 3:59 Capital Calls Explained: Parking VC Commitments in Bitcoin Across Halving Cycles 7:17 The Hurdle Rate Problem: Why Holding Bitcoin Can Be a Disservice to Shareholders 11:46 MSCI’s Non-Operating Company Decision and the 1940 Act Loophole 13:37 Bitcoin, Ethereum and XRP: What Happens If Altcoin Treasuries Trigger a Backlash 15:21 Europe Went Backwards: BaFin, the First Bitcoin ETP and Post-Merkel Overregulation 20:20 France’s Bond Crisis and Why Germany Won’t Bail Out the French 23:30 What Rising Sovereign Yields Mean for Bitcoin and Why It Dips on Fed Hikes
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Bitcoin is holding near $80K, yet the crowd has never seemed less excited and that might be the most bullish signal of all. Michael Sullivan, software engineer and author of Bitcoin Sentiment Weekly, breaks down what language-based sentiment data says about this market. He explains why excitement, conviction and desire are washed out to levels he compares to 2015, and why that looks like the early stages of a disbelief rally.
Chapters: 00:00 Michael Sullivan on Bitcoin and Currency Decay 00:58 Bitcoin’s Pullback From $86K: Is This a Disbelief Rally? 02:10 Bitcoin Sentiment Compared to 2015 and 2022 03:50 How to Tell When the Bitcoin Market Is Overheated 05:05 Measuring Excitement, Conviction and Desire in Bitcoin 06:42 The Next Bitcoin Bull Run Narrative: Bitcoin and AI 08:12 Investor Psychology: Buying Near All-Time Highs vs. DCA 09:42 Bitcoin and Traditional Finance Growing Together 10:54 Why Short-Term Bitcoin Holders Are So Frustrated 12:52 How AI’s Deflation Strengthens the Case for Bitcoin
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
The hash ribbon recovered on August 26 and has held for 61 days. Historically, Bitcoin was higher one year later in six of seven counted recoveries, about a 72% edge. Sean Hagan breaks down the signal, the misses (15 of 231, notably April 2021 at -17%), the January signal still 12% underwater, and why the 30-day hash rate at roughly 1.1 ZH, up 13% from July, says the worst of the miner stress is behind us. Grace Remington asks the right question: if miners left voluntarily, is the signal still reliable?
Chapters: 0:00 The Hash Ribbon Explained: Counting Miner Capitulation Days Since 2011 0:26 A New Record: 223 of 365 Days in Capitulation vs. 141 in 2012 1:01 Why This Cycle Is Different: Miners Left for $100 Billion in AI Contracts 1:48 More Like the 2021 China Ban Than 2018 or 2022 2:14 The Timing Still Fits: Capitulation Peaked 56 Days After the June 30 Low 2:37 Hash Ribbon Recovered 61 Straight Days, Hash Rate Up 13% From the Low 3:20 Price Agrees: MVRV Above Its Average and Bitcoin Above the 50-Week 3:58 Is the Signal Reliable If Miners Left Voluntarily? Higher 6 of 7 Times 5:18 Could Hash Rate Come Back From AI as the Build-Out Hits Bottlenecks? 6:52 A Backward-Looking Chart With a 70%-Plus Directional Track Record
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
On August 15, 1971, Richard Nixon announced that he had directed Treasury Secretary John Connally “to suspend temporarily the convertibility of the dollar into gold.” The suspension was never lifted. Fifty-five years later to the day, Lucho Poletti unveiled the first of ten drawings responding to that decree.
Europe had experienced its own monetary upheavals. Hieronymus Bosch and Pieter Bruegel the Elder worked during an era of expanding banking, credit, and speculation. Antwerp, where Bruegel worked, became one of Europe’s great commercial centers. Both painters populated their compositions with hundreds of figures, constructing elaborate worlds in which human behavior, social order, and moral judgment could be examined simultaneously.
Master Cuts Out The Stone (after Hemessen), Pepenardo (2025)
Bitcoin artists have increasingly returned to this visual tradition. Pepenardo’s Master Cuts Out the Stone, exhibited by BMAG earlier this year, reimagined Jan Sanders van Hemessen’s The Surgeon as a study of who extracts and who is extracted from. Carlijn Kingma’s The Waterworks of Money, shown at Bitcoin Amsterdam last year, depicted the modern monetary system as an interconnected landscape. Complex systems seem to invite pictures that hold everything in a single frame.
Lucho Poletti has made bitcoin-related art since 2017, describing his practice as visual propaganda for the monetary revolution. A contributor to the Bitcoin Conference art gallery since 2021, he returns to Bitcoin Amsterdam this November with Ten Decrees.
The series reimagines ten paintings, four by Bosch and six by Bruegel, around money. Fiat, Latin for “let it be done,” becomes the organizing principle. Nine titles issue commands: let there be fury, profit, chaff, a game, folly, hunger, refuge, collapse, and ash. The tenth, Ultima Fiat, reverses that authority: let it be the last.
Furia Fiat: Let there be fury, Lucho Poletti (2026)
Unveiled on August 15, 2026, the anniversary of Nixon’s announcement, the series follows a biweekly release schedule beginning August 29 and concluding January 3, 2027, the anniversary of Bitcoin’s Genesis Block. Each drawing contains hundreds of figures and objects, with inscriptions often visible only at close range. The 30-by-20-inch prints, produced in editions of ten, form a composition spanning approximately four meters when arranged in two rows of five.
Five drawings have been released, most recently Fiat Moria, after Bruegel’s Netherlandish Proverbs, on October 24. The sixth, Fiat Fames, follows November 7.
Ahead of Bitcoin Amsterdam, November 5–6, I spoke with Poletti about the recurring influence of Bosch and Bruegel on bitcoin art, the relationship between allegory and propaganda, and translating his densely detailed drawings to the conference’s main-stage LED installation.
The Garden of Earthly Delights, Hieronymus Bosch (c. 1490–1510)
BMAG: Bosch and Bruegel seem to be having a synchronistic moment among artists interested in Bitcoin. Both worked in what is now Belgium and the Netherlands, during a period when Antwerp was emerging as a major financial center and the Habsburgs were debasing coinage. What is it about transitional periods (like the current one) that draws artists back to Bosch and Bruegel and their densely populated landscapes?
Lucho Poletti: Because they had already solved the problem I was stuck with: how do you draw a whole society going wrong at once? Bosch and Bruegel put hundreds of people in a single frame, each busy with their own concerns. The system shows up in the sum of it. You don’t look at a Bruegel, you search it. It’s a great way to depict the effects of money, which nobody really sees and everybody feels.
They also lived through a money problem a lot like ours. Silver from the Americas poured into Europe through Seville and on to the bankers in Antwerp. Prices across Western Europe rose sixfold over 150 years. Philip II defaulted in 1557 and the crash spread across all of Europe. Two years later Bruegel painted Netherlandish Proverbs, a village where everyone is absorbed in something foolish and nobody can see the whole.
The four Bosch pieces are about appetite: the temptation, and the bill that shows up after. The six Bruegels are about the crowd, and how society behaves once the rules stop making sense.
Fiat Lucrum: Let there be profit, Lucho Poletti (2026)
BMAG: The series draws on the original meaning of the F-word every bitcoiner knows. Nine of your titles use fiat as a command, while the tenth, Ultima Fiat, seems to reverse that authority. How did you arrive at Latin as the language of the series, and why does the final decree change speaker?
Lucho Poletti: Fiat was never a noun. In Latin it’s a verb, “let it be done.” It’s the word God speaks in the Latin Genesis before the light comes on: fiat lux. Someone with authority says so and it happens. That’s a literal description of how fiat money comes into existence, so I wanted the verb in every title.
Latin wasn’t a stretch for me. I’ve titled work in it for years: Moneta Divina, Cypher Deos, and Novus Moneta Seclorum dating back to 2020. The dollar already speaks it, too. Turn over a one-dollar bill and there are three Latin mottos on the back. Ultima Fiat, Fiat Lucrum and Furia Fiat had their names before the series did. Once there were three decrees in concept, I kept going until I had ten, and the name for the whole series became obvious. Ten Decrees has the Ten Commandments sitting under it, which suits work rebuilt out of painted sermons. In Fiat Lucrum there’s a lighthouse at the top left with FIAT LUX GENESIS 1:3 engraved into it. The title is the phrase rewritten for the money printers: let there be light turned into let there be profit.
Fiat Lucrum (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
Nine of the decrees are issued to you, in the flat voice an institution uses. Let there be profit, let there be hunger, let there be a game. The tenth is the only one we get to say back. Ultima fiat means “let it be the last,” which is closer to a plea than an order. Every one of us has been living under the first nine since 1971, whether we noticed or not, and Bitcoin is how we issue the tenth. It closes the series on January 3, the anniversary of the Genesis Block, which also happens to be my birthday.
BMAG: Bosch and Bruegel constructed extraordinarily complex visual worlds where allegory, satire, religious symbolism, and everyday life coexist. Their paintings invite close inspection but rarely offer a single, definitive interpretation. In Ten Decrees, you’re borrowing their compositions while introducing a more explicit critique of the monetary system. How do you approach the relationship between ambiguity and message in your work?
Lucho Poletti: The words carry the message so the people don’t have to. Bosch’s Garden of Earthly Delights doesn’t have a single word in it. Fiat Lucrum has more than fifty lettered objects, and some are as blunt as a protest sign: four money presses lettered QE-1, QE-2, QE-3 and QE-∞, and a little hand-lettered card on a broker’s desk that reads genius, we print, you pay, have a nice day. Nobody has to wonder what I think of the money system.
Fiat Palea (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
I keep the ambiguity in the people. In Fiat Lucrum there’s a crowd cheering a woman who holds up a $ on a golden staff under a sign that says ETF, and that crowd is wearing my mask. So is the man signing the leverage contract, and so is the woman taking the mortgage. In Fiat Palea a man in the mask is knee-deep in a pile of printed bills. Bosch drew his own neighbors into the middle of the garden, and I drew mine. If the ₿ on a forehead were a badge of honor, I wouldn’t hand it out like that. It’s more a badge of the aware, the initiated. Knowing the money is broken doesn’t make one a saint.
I’m careful with endings too. These pieces show the exit while not promising a way out. Near the middle of Fiat Moria there’s a lit doorway with MONEY ₿ BETTER WORLD over the arch, and a plain-faced man on the step looking back at the square. He hasn’t gone in yet, and nobody’s stopping him. Where you’d be standing in that picture is your call.
Fiat Palea: Let there be chaff, Lucho Poletti (2026)
BMAG: In Fiat Lucrum, your reinterpretation of Bosch’s Garden of Earthly Delights, you introduce a system of waterworks: pipes, reservoirs, and flowing liquidity. Bosch often allowed viewers to recognize things that the figures within his paintings could not. What possibilities does that kind of visual allegory offer you when depicting something as abstract as the monetary system?
Lucho Poletti: What Bosch never had in his garden was plumbing, so I gave it some. Water organizes the whole of Fiat Lucrum. It starts clean high in the mountains on the left, pours out of a machine in Eden and settles in a reflecting basin. Cut into the basin’s wall there’s an inspection window with fish swimming behind the glass. Somebody built a viewing port into the reservoir so you could check it, and every full node on the Bitcoin network is that window.
Downstream the water widens into a lake. In the middle sits a glass tank lettered FRESH LIQUIDITY, with BOTTOMLESS engraved on the bowl, and eight people are having the party of their lives inside it. The valve wheel that controls the flow is on top of the dome, outside the glass, where none of them can reach it. Monetary policy gets set by someone who isn’t at the party. And the tank leaks. From there the water runs orange, down a stream and over a waterfall into a pool where a tick with a $ on its cheek drinks it through a hose.
Fiat Lucrum (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
That’s the Bosch trick you’re describing. The bathers can’t see the leak or the valve, and you can see both from across the room. Richard Cantillon worked out around 1730 that new money helps whoever gets it first and costs whoever gets it last. I drew it as a watercourse because everybody already understands water: whoever’s upstream drinks first, and everyone downstream gets what’s left.
BMAG: Looking across the series, are there particular details, references, or artistic decisions that you feel are especially important but might be overlooked by viewers? What would you want someone encountering these drawings for the first time to spend more time looking at?
Lucho Poletti: Up close is where these work, and most of what matters in them is small.
Start with the plain faces. Everybody spots the Satoshi masks and the $ skulls first because they’re the loud ones, but the plain faces belong to the people the system is happening to. In Furia Fiat a line of bald men crawl on their hands and knees with red tubes plugged into the backs of their skulls, and the red is the same color as the fluid in a bowl a few meters away that says TIME. That’s what’s being drained out of them. In Fiat Palea, Adam and Eve stand under a serpent with a $ for an eye. They’re wearing the mask, but neither of them has a ₿ on the brow yet.
Furia Fiat (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
Then look at how characters connect across a distance. In Fiat Ludus a sack lettered STIMULUS sits on a bench next to an older figure, and a little way off a kid walks away with the same sack on his back, lettered THE BILL. A blindfolded boy feels around with his arms out while the man lunging in beside him holds up a bunch of $ balloons the boy can’t see. Even the enrollment forms are signed by Seymore Debt and Max D. Out.
Fiat Ludus (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
Fiat Ludus (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
In Fiat Palea a broken crate stenciled EXECUTIVE ORDER 6102 sits in the straw, and further back, bolted across a vault, a plate reads WINDOW, NO REDEMPTION. Roosevelt took the gold in 1933 and Nixon closed the window in 1971, and I put the two close enough that you read one and then find the other. Up higher in the same piece, a guy in the mask with WHOOPS across his vest is pouring gasoline on a burning bank. In Furia Fiat, the $ skulls stand on GNOSIS and clutch books of knowledge, keeping them for themselves.
The bubbles are dated. Fiat Ludus has a sphere with tulips growing out of the top, marked 1637 and 1720, and another with a hen sitting on a WALL STREET egg, marked 1929 and 2008. Variety’s front page the day after the 1929 crash read WALL ST. LAYS AN EGG. Some of the skies have thin straight lines of cloud behind the smoke, the kind a plane leaves.
Fiat Ludus (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
Watch the prices, too. A price in dollars only goes up: at CANTILLON’S hot dog stand in Fiat Ludus the 5¢ is crossed out and the sign says $9. A price in sats only goes down: a fish stall in Fiat Moria has 4000 crossed out, then 2000, and now it’s 1000 SATS. In Fiat Ludus, the carrots changing hands have dropped from 7,500 to 3,000 SATS on the chalkboard next to the dollar hopscotch.
Fiat Ludus (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
The Latin is there to be read. MORITURI TE SALUTANT, those who are about to die salute you, is carved around the rim of the arena in Fiat Ludus. EX NIHILO, out of nothing, is cut over an empty vault in Fiat Palea. In Fiat Moria the $ skull leaning out of the window has a plaque on either side of him: MUNDUS VULT DECIPI, the world wants to be deceived, and $TULTORUM INFINITUS EST NUMERUS, the number of fools is infinite, with a $ for the S. Fiat Lucrum has a little panel that runs a whole life in four stops: school, debt, work, death.
And in Fiat Moria there’s a small round time machine with NO RETURN on its side and 1944-2026 on the dial. A man is climbing out of it, staring at the village. 1944 is Bretton Woods, when the world tied its money to the dollar and the dollar to gold. He left then and he’s only just arrived, and he can’t quite believe what he’s looking at.
Fiat Moria (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
None of that comes with a caption. You find it by standing close for a long time, the way you would with a Bruegel, and the finding is the whole point.
Fiat Ludus: Let there be a game, Lucho Poletti (2026)
BMAG: Each drawing is 18,000 pixels wide, populated by hundreds of figures, with every Satoshi mask drawn by hand and details that only reveal themselves up close. You’ve described the work as “crafted, not generated.” At a time when AI can convincingly imitate the Old Masters, what significance does that labor have for you, and how does it shape the way you want these works to be experienced?
Lucho Poletti: “Crafted, not generated” is a phrase I came up with to sum up where the work in these pieces actually is. There are machines in my process, but they’re only one part of it. A model I trained on years of my own work does the rough first pass on a composition. I think of it as an apprentice. Bosch came out of a family workshop, and the masters of his day leaned on assistants for the groundwork so their own hours could go into the meaning. Mine roughs out the scene and gives me a base to build toward the standard they set. Then I spend weeks on each piece in a grueling manual process in Photoshop, making the decisions and drawing in hundreds of figures, objects, symbols and phrases until the art says what I mean.
Fiat Moria (detail), Lucho Poletti (2026)
AI can imitate the look of a Bosch or a Bruegel pretty convincingly now. What it can’t do is mean anything. It won’t decide that the valve on the liquidity tank in Fiat Lucrum belongs outside the glass, where the bathers can’t reach it. It won’t decide that the slop on the ground should be piggy banks wired into the money presses, each with its own name: SAVINGS, PENSION, NEST EGG. It doesn’t make jokes either. It’s never going to sit a fool in a jester’s cap on a platform lettered TAKE IT AT FACE VALUE while a $ skull does his makeup. My personal philosophy is that if I don’t do the majority of the work, it’s not my art. I hold myself to that, and anyone who looks at these up close can see a person made the decisions that matter.
That’s how I’d like people to take these in: up close, and for a long time. I don’t ask anyone to trust me on how they were made. The work answers that better than I can.
Fiat Moria: Let there be folly, Lucho Poletti (2026)
BMAG: You’ve been part of the Bitcoin Conference since 2021, and this November Ten Decrees comes to the main stage at Bitcoin Amsterdam, not far from the historical centers where Bosch and Bruegel worked. These drawings are extraordinarily detailed, designed to reward close inspection. How are you approaching their translation to monumental LED screens, and does exhibiting them in the Netherlands carry any particular significance for you?
Lucho Poletti: The prints were meant for one person standing close to search the work and find details that speak to them. An LED wall gets a thousand people at fifty meters, which is an amazing opportunity to create a visual experience for the still pieces, so I’ve done my best to create a compelling one for each piece.
Each one gets fifteen seconds, in the order they were released. The big center wall carries the center of each piece in one slow pass from left to right, so the room gets the shape of it. The screen on the right opens on the Bosch or Bruegel it came from, with its name and date, and halfway through it wipes across to mine. The screen on the left side pulls out lateral details you’d never catch from the floor, like the ship of fools riding the mast in Fiat Moria, or the pigs feeding at the DEBASED trough. All five released so far play back to back as one loop, old master and new money side by side the whole way through.
Ten Decrees, Bitcoin Amsterdam main-stage visualization rendering, Lucho Poletti (2026)
The Netherlands matters to me. Bosch spent his whole life in ’s-Hertogenbosch, about an hour south of Amsterdam by train. Some of Bruegel’s proverbs are still in use in Dutch: people still say someone hangs his cloak to the wind when he turns with the crowd, and in Fiat Moria, a man wearing a Satoshi mask jumps off a mountain, holding his cloak in his hand—a reference to the Dutch proverb about changing one’s position to suit the prevailing winds.
Amsterdam has its own chapter in this story. The Bank of Amsterdam opened in 1609 to give merchants a money nobody could debase, and for over a century its bank guilder traded at a premium over ordinary coin because people trusted the silver was in the vault. David Hume held it up as the model of a fully backed bank. It had been lending to the Dutch East India Company quietly, and when that became public in 1790 the premium vanished and the bank declared itself insolvent. I can’t think of a better city to show a series about monetary decrees and trust, two months before the last one lands on the Genesis Block anniversary.
The Tower of Babel, Pieter Bruegel the Elder (1563)
Exhibition & Further Reading
Lucho Poletti’s Ten Decrees will be on view on the main stage at Bitcoin Amsterdam, November 5–6, 2026, as part of the Bitcoin Museum & Art Gallery (BMAG) programming. Explore Poletti’s detailed write-ups on each Decree for a deeper look at the artwork, symbolism, and historical references throughout the series, and follow him on X.
The Bitcoin Museum & Art Gallery (BMAG) organizes international exhibitions, auctions, and artist collaborations exploring bitcoin and its cultural implications.
Join us at Bitcoin Amsterdam, November 5–6, 2026, and use code BA26-BMAG20 for discounted admission. Get your tickets here.
Bitcoin tax rules have evolved, but the self-assessment system hasn’t changed. Rob Massey, who has advised on crypto taxes at Deloitte since 2012, explains why using Bitcoin as money creates “new muscle” for reporting, which wallet moves are and aren’t realization events, and why 1099s from brokers will never be the complete picture. Plus the one thing he’d ask Bitcoiners to advocate for, and it isn’t a repeal.
Chapters: 0:00 Where Bitcoin Tax Rules Stand: Self-Assessment and Barter Transactions 1:25 Broker Reporting, 1099s and Why They’ll Never Be the Full Picture 2:06 No De Minimis Exemption Has Passed: Report Everything, Small or Large 3:00 What Business Leaders Ask Now: ETFs, Leverage and Bitcoin Lending 4:07 Paying the Plumber Is Taxable and the IRS Sees Everything On Chain 5:38 What to Ask Treasury For: More Guidance on Lending, Character and Basis 6:51 Bitcoin Across Borders: No Tax Treaties, Withholding and Subpart F 8:50 How Multinationals Compare Bitcoin and Stablecoins by Payment Corridor 10:06 Unreported 2015 Pizza? Attorney, CPA, Complete Narrative, Come Clean 12:37 Proving Cost Basis After Years of Moving Coins,
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Bitcoin Core just changed its security policy because AI can find bugs with a simple prompt. Jameson Lopp explains the bigger trend behind it: two and a half months of exponential growth in vulnerability discovery, attackers adopting uncensored AI models first, and security researchers who “have not been able to get a lot of rest.” He breaks down the PHP remote code execution flaw, why the fallout was smaller than expected, and why security now has to be real time and built into the development pipeline instead of a once-a-year audit.
Chapters: 0:00 Bitcoin Core Changes Its Security Policy: AI Finds Bugs With a Simple Prompt 1:04 Google’s 500,000-Qubit Estimate: Physical vs. Logical Qubits 2:00 The Quantum Timeline: “If We Have Less Than a Decade, We’re Behind” 2:57 Why We Don’t Have a Quantum Computer With More Than a Few Hundred Usable Qubits 4:26 30% of Addresses Have Exposed Keys: Who Attackers Would Target First 6:27 Why a Quantum Upgrade Will Take Years: Taproot, Consensus and Untested Cryptography 7:54 The PHP Remote Code Execution Flaw Explained 9:41 The Real Trend: Exponential AI Vulnerability Discovery and Exhausted Defenders 10:54 Security Must Be Real Time: From Annual Audits to the Development Pipeline 13:19 Hardware That Can’t Be Patched, and Why Wrench Attacks Have Topped 700
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Bitcoin fell to $79K this weekend, and this week both the Fed and the Bank of Japan decide on rates. Duke Waldrop, Head of Asia Markets at UTXO Management, joins Grace Remington and Sean Hagan to explain why a yen repricing hits Bitcoin first: macro funds with yen-denominated liabilities become forced sellers, and Bitcoin’s 24/7 liquidity is where they find the exit. He also breaks down why Metaplanet is trading below the value of its own Bitcoin, why possible removal from MSCI indexes on November 30 doesn’t change the thesis, and why the bet is on the Tokyo team’s execution.
Chapters: 0:00 Bitcoin at $79K, Fed and Bank of Japan Decisions, and Metaplanet Below NAV 0:29 How Asian Investors Are Learning the Treasury Playbook 1:16 The Yen Carry Trade and Why Bitcoin Sees the Liquidity Shock First 2:12 Who Sells First If the Bank of Japan Surprises: Overleveraged Macro Funds 2:58 Metaplanet’s Nasdaq Route Through Super League and the Second Liquidity Pool 3:46 Why Metaplanet Trades Below Its Bitcoin: Bitcoin Per Share Is the Metric 4:30 Asia Is “Way Behind” on Bitcoin Preferreds 5:32 MSCI Removal on November 30: Why It Changes Nothing Fundamental 6:57 Balance Sheet Caps, Delisting and Moon Inc. 8:45 Thailand, Astra’s Cash-Flow Model, Capital Group’s 11% and “The Moon, a Million”
This video is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investments in digital assets involve significant risk and may result in loss of capital. Both UTXO Management and BTC Inc., producer of BMTV, are owned by Nakamoto Inc. (NASDAQ: NAKA)
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Seven of the largest banks in the world are now running on Coinbase infrastructure, and Brett Tejpaul, Co-CEO of Coinbase Institutional, says they’re having a “Kodak moment.” He joins Grace Remington and Sean Hagan to explain why the driver has shifted from Bitcoin ETFs to stablecoin payments now that money can move from a Citi account to USDC, across the blockchain in a second, and into a corporate account on the other side. He also gives a candid read on Bitcoin: the macro setup is great, the performance has been disappointing, and institutions aren’t yet treating it as anything but a tech trade.
Chapters: 0:00 Seven of the World’s Largest Banks Are Using Coinbase Infrastructure 1:19 From ETFs to Payments: Citi, USDC and Instant Bank-to-Blockchain Transfers 2:44 $400 Million an Hour in Stablecoins and the Banks’ “Kodak Moment” 4:38 Stablecoins Are a “Speck of Dust”: Payment Providers First, Then Banks 6:10 Agentic Commerce Arriving at the Same Time as the Big Players 6:49 Is Bitcoin Still a Leveraged Tech Trade? “Disappointing” Performance, Great Setup 8:44 Connecting U.S. Funds to Deribit’s 85% Options Market Share 11:06 The Second Wave: Net-New Entrants and Coinbase’s “Amazon to AWS” Pivot 12:57 Activating the Whole U.S. Through Coinbase Infrastructure 13:56 Quantum, 90% ETF Custody Share and “Safe Forever”
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Bitcoin price traded near $80,000 on Monday, after falling about 2% earlier in the session. The price has dipped below that level several times in recent days and recovered each time.
Selling pressure has been building. Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded about $635 million in outflows on October 22. A brief drop below $80,000 last week also triggered roughly $800 million in liquidations of long positions, or bets that prices would rise.
The next major test to look out for is the Federal Reserve’s two-day meeting, which ends October 28. The Fed raised its target range to 3.75% to 4% in September, and its minutes suggested another increase could come by year-end.
Most recent market odds favor the Fed holding rates steady, though those odds have shifted. Traders are watching Fed Chair Kevin Warsh’s remarks for signs of a December hike.
Higher interest rates typically pull money away from risky assets, including crypto. Broadly speaking, a hold could keep bitcoin price between roughly $80,000 and $88,000. A rate hike could push it toward the lower end of that range.
Bitcoin price backdrop
Geopolitical tensions are also weighing on markets. Oil rose above $100 a barrel in early September as strikes between the U.S. and Iran escalated. Higher energy prices feed into inflation, which affects the Fed’s decisions.
In tech, Anthropic is reportedly preparing an initial public offering that could value the AI company near $965 billion. The timing has shifted toward the weeks before the November midterm elections, but no date has been confirmed.
U.S. stocks surged a bit Monday as investors geared up for a busy week of Big Tech earnings and the Federal Reserve’s interest-rate decision. The Nasdaq rose 0.8%, the S&P 500 gained 0.6%, and the Dow climbed 0.3%.
Alphabet and Microsoft report Wednesday, followed by Amazon Thursday, while markets largely expect the Fed to hold rates steady.
AI-related stocks rallied following Anthropic’s IPO filing. Tesla jumped 6%, while Meta plans to raise up to $95 billion for AI investments.
As of writing, bitcoin price trades at $80,215, down nearly $4,000 or 4.75%, on the month. Over the past month, prices have ranged from a high of $86,806.95 to a low of $79,397.76. Bitcoin price peaked above $86,000 in early October, then slid toward $80,000 in the second week of the month.
A brief rally around October 21 pushed it back near $84,000, but those gains faded within days. Trading volume over the past 24 hours reached about $18.12 billion.
Bitcoin price remains far below its all-time high of $126,277.05.
Galaxy Research believes bitcoin’s bear market ended in June and that the asset has entered an accumulation phase, according to a research alert from the firm. “We believe now is an attractive time to buy and hold bitcoin,” the report said.
Bitcoin traded near $80,000 at the time of the note, about 35% below its October 2025 high and 39% above the June 30 low. The price would need to rise 53% to retake the previous record. The S&P 500, by comparison, sits within 1% of a record set on Oct. 6.
The report lays out four arguments: technical, positioning, fundamental and sentiment.
Bitcoin technicals
Galaxy uses two weekly moving averages to track bitcoin’s bear markets. The 200-week average has acted as a floor in each one, and the 50-week average has acted as a ceiling, according to the firm.
Bitcoin lost the 50-week average in November 2025 and stayed below it for 44 weeks. The June low tested the 200-week average and held, with the worst weekly close coming 4.7% beneath it. Price closed back above the 50-week average in September, and the week ended Oct. 18 was the fifth consecutive weekly close above that level.
Galaxy counted 13 such reclaims since 2011 and said the outcome depended on how long price had spent below the line. The four reclaims that ended spells of 20 weeks or more were higher a year later, by between 55% and 1,497%, and none closed more than 8.4% below the reclaim level in the following 12 months. Of the nine that ended shorter spells, seven fell more than 25% within a year.
The firm said the halving cycle supports the same conclusion. Prior cycles bottomed on days 777, 889 and 912 after their halvings. Oct. 22 was day 916 of the current cycle. Galaxy said the gains that followed those lows (87x, 19x and 7.6x) have shrunk each cycle and that it does not forecast a repeat.
The current drawdown of 53% is the shallowest in bitcoin’s history, the report said, and the first in which price did not fall below the network’s realized cost basis.
Positioning
The report identified basis traders and macro funds as the main sellers since the top. Asset managers’ net long position in CME bitcoin futures fell 57% from the week of the all-time high, according to Commodity Futures Trading Commission data cited by Galaxy.
Leveraged funds’ net short position, which represents the futures side of the cash-and-carry trade against spot ETFs, shrank by a similar amount. The front-month basis averaged 7.9% annualized in the 30 days before the high and 4.8% in the 30 days to Oct. 21, which the firm said no longer covers the trade’s costs and risk.
Galaxy pointed to 13F filings to identify the sellers. Millennium Management, Brevan Howard, Goldman Sachs, Capula, Farallon, D. E. Shaw, Schonfeld, Symmetry and Tudor cut their spot ETF holdings by between 29% and 100% between the September 2025 and June 2026 quarter-ends, a combined 68,000 BTC.
Because total holdings across all 2,200 filers fell by 48,000 BTC, the remaining institutions added in aggregate. Morgan Stanley’s wealth management arm, Mubadala and the Abu Dhabi Investment Council were among the buyers.
Spot ETF holdings dropped 11% from peak to trough while price fell 53%, and the funds have added 87,000 BTC since the June low, the report said.
Fundamentals and sentiment
Galaxy’s fundamental case centers on U.S. fiscal conditions. Federal debt reached $40.44 trillion on Oct. 20, fiscal 2026 ended with a $1.99 trillion deficit, and the 10-year Treasury yield hit 5.31% on Oct. 5, its highest since 2007.
The firm argued that a government refinancing that debt at 5% while running 6% deficits faces pressure to inflate.
The report described AI-related borrowing, which Morgan Stanley expects to reach $570 billion this year, as a contributor to that pressure rather than a competitor for capital.
On sentiment, Galaxy compared the current environment to 2015–16 and 2018–19, when mainstream finance embraced “blockchain” and dismissed bitcoin. Both periods coincided with cycle lows. The firm said the 2026 version is “stablecoins and tokenization, not bitcoin,” citing bank pilots of tokenized deposits, the Senate’s failed cloture vote on the Clarity Act on Sept. 15, and Google searches for “bitcoin” at multiyear lows.
Risks
Galaxy set a tripwire for its view: a weekly close below the 50-week average, about $76,540, that is not regained within a month. It cited AI-enabled theft, including the $387.5 million Bitget exploit, while noting none of the incidents involved the Bitcoin protocol itself.
On quantum computing, the report said 7.1 million BTC sit in outputs with exposed public keys but that no cryptographically relevant quantum computer exists. It pointed to BIP-360’s merge into the BIP repository in February and Galaxy’s own $5 million quantum readiness commitment.
Real estate is the largest asset class in the world at $300–500 trillion, and Leon Wankum says Bitcoin won’t just overtake it, it will outgrow it. The real estate operator and author of Digital Real Estate joins Spencer Nichols on the Bitcoin Magazine Podcast to explain why real estate only became money after 1971, why 80–90% of its value is monetary premium rather than utility, and why that premium is migrating to Bitcoin the way information migrated to the internet. He lays out his $1,000 trillion base case, a price path to $1 million by the late 2030s, and why it’s now financially smarter to rent and buy Bitcoin.
Host: Spencer Nichols — Bitcoin Magazine Leon Wankum — Author of Digital Real Estate
Chapters: 0:00 Why $1,000 Trillion Is the Base Case for Bitcoin 1:44 From Rome to Nixon: How Real Estate Became Money After 1971 3:53 Leverage, Cash Flow and Why Most Real Estate Deals Don’t Work Right Now 6:24 Real Estate Is a $300–500 Trillion Market and Bitcoin Will Outgrow It 9:11 Collateral Doesn’t Need Cash Flow: Bitcoin’s 50% CAGR vs. Real Estate’s 4–6% 12:22 Why Bitcoin’s Four-Year Cycles and Volatility Are a Feature for Collateral 15:46 Rent and Buy Bitcoin: How the Monetary Premium Migrates Out of Real Estate 20:30 The Digital Real Estate Playbook: Sell, Accumulate, Refinance, Dual Collateral 25:34 Bitcoin Treasury Preferreds at 15% vs. Rental Property and the Future of Interest Rates 30:33 Bitcoin to $1 Million by the Late 2030s
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Login
