Bitcoin Brief

Sup, freaks.

Alan Lane has published a new account of Silvergate's liquidation, and I want to return to something we covered in detail in 2024. The bank paid its depositors back. The businesses that depended on it still lost their bank. If you want to understand why bitcoin needs to exist, it is worth spending some time with the difference between those two outcomes.

We also launched our commercial real estate playbook today. If you own, invest in or operate commercial property, get Chris Drzyzga's Bitcoin playbook here. It covers treasury reserves, capital structure and property operations, with a framework for evaluating where bitcoin fits and the risks to consider.

LEAD STORY

Silvergate Repaid Its Depositors. Its Customers Still Lost Their Bank.

Al Lane is a good friend, and I am very confident in his account of what happened at Silvergate. When I read his essay on the liquidation, published yesterday, I see a banker who did the hard thing, protected his depositors and lost his bank anyway.

Silvergate met a run of roughly 70% of demand deposits, according to Al. Contemporary company disclosures put digital-asset customer deposits at $11.9 billion at the end of September 2022 and $3.8 billion at the end of December. That is an extraordinary amount of money to pay out under pressure. How many banks in the United States could withstand withdrawals on that scale and still make every depositor whole? I would not bet on many.

The Federal Reserve confirmed in July 2024 that Silvergate had completed its liquidation and repaid all customer deposits. On the most basic obligation a bank has to its depositors, Silvergate delivered. Al and his team did right by the people whose money they held.

Think about what those customers lost anyway.

Silvergate had built dollar payment infrastructure for an industry that never closes. Its Silvergate Exchange Network let customers move dollar deposits between participating accounts around the clock. For a bitcoin business operating on a Saturday night, that mattered. The bank understood its customers and built a service around how they actually worked.

My view is that they were punished for serving the wrong clients in the eyes of the Biden administration. They met an extraordinary run. Their customers got their money. Washington still made continuing to serve those customers untenable.

We covered the evidence in September 2024, including Elaine Hetrick's sworn account and Caitlin Long's analysis of Operation Chokepoint 2.0. Hetrick's declaration described a bank that had stabilized and could continue serving its remaining customers, but faced supervisory pressure that forced it to consider a different business, a sale or liquidation. That account is consistent with what Al is telling us now.

Then look at what the Fed did for the rest of the banking system.

Silvergate announced its wind-down on March 8, 2023. On March 12, the Fed announced the Bank Term Funding Program. Four days later. The program offered eligible institutions loans of up to one year against qualifying securities valued at par, rather than their depressed market prices. The Fed said the purpose was to eliminate the need to sell those securities quickly in times of stress.

Months after Silvergate had met its enormous deposit outflows, and days after it announced its liquidation, the Fed created a facility to help other banks avoid forced securities sales. Separately, the government protected all depositors at Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, including uninsured depositors. Those protections did not save those banks' shareholders, and the BTFP was a broadly available lending facility, not a grant to a named favorite. But the contrast in Washington's response is impossible for me to ignore.

When the pressure was concentrated on a bank serving bitcoin businesses, the outcome was a wind-down. When the stress spread, officials found a way to lend against securities at face value. I see hypocrisy and political favoritism in that sequence. The people overseeing the system were willing to change the terms when a different set of banks needed help.

The Fed's inspector general criticized Silvergate's governance and risk management, and Lane settled SEC compliance-disclosure charges without admitting or denying them. Those proceedings are part of the record. They do not explain away the contrast between a bank that repaid its depositors and the emergency support Washington assembled for the wider system.

The withdrawal of the agencies' crypto-related joint statements in 2025 was welcome. It did not give Silvergate's customers their bank back.

I do not want access to money resting on the judgment of a relatively small group of officials. A business can be legal and still find that nobody wants the regulatory trouble of banking it. You do not need Congress to outlaw the business if the people controlling its access to dollars can make it too expensive to serve.

Bitcoin does not eliminate dollar payroll, suppliers or tax bills. We should keep fighting for lawful businesses to have access to banking. But we should also build more commerce around money that does not require a bank to maintain an account for either side of the transaction.

With bitcoin held in your own custody, an official's discomfort with your industry does not give them a key to your savings. I would rather build around that property than the goodwill of whoever happens to be running the banking agencies this year.

SIGNAL

OpenAI's mathematics claim comes with a fight over credit

OpenAI has released a proposed solution to the Navier-Stokes Millennium Prize Problem, alongside a Lean formalization. Independent scrutiny still has to establish what the proof delivers. Meanwhile, mathematician Tristan Buckmaster says OpenAI pressured him over publication and authorship after his work with Levent Alpöge. Sébastien Bubeck disputes that account, while acknowledging and apologizing for career-related wording.

The customer-data question needs care. OpenAI says no specific user data was accessed to solve the problem, while not ruling out de-identified usage data improving its models. Buckmaster explicitly says he does not know whether his data was used. Thomas Wolf, who amplified the dispute, subsequently urged hearing OpenAI's side and rejected a specific chat-theft insinuation. There is no established theft here. I do want clear answers about how a research tool handles unpublished work when its provider is also competing to make the discovery.

Jacob Coxon says he quit Anthropic over the race to self-improving AI

Jacob Coxon says he resigned from Anthropic on Tuesday after pretraining research at Anthropic and OpenAI. He calls the race toward self-improving AI reckless and raises a temporary ban on capability improvements. His predictions are not demonstrated capabilities.

I take an insider walking away seriously. But warnings from Anthropic or OpenAI researchers deserve a grain of salt, not automatic deference. I do not like effective altruism's myopic, doomer worldview, and I do not trust its adherents to decide who gets to use these technologies. Sam Bankman-Fried was an effective altruist. Grand claims about saving humanity are no substitute for evidence or accountability.

I've written about EA's influence around Anthropic and raised that concern with Jamie McAvity on the podcast. That is not a claim about Coxon's personal affiliation. It is why I want specific, testable evidence from these labs, rather than another appeal to trust the people who say they alone understand the danger.

Your voice command can leave more behind than you intended

Gamers Nexus and collaborating researchers report finding readable speech logs on tested LG televisions. Their investigation describes a listening window that can continue after the intended command until sustained silence, pulling nearby conversation into the transcript. That raises an obvious question: did the person asking the TV to do something understand how much speech the session would capture?

The separate screen-dark recording demonstration involved a compromised TV under researcher control, including a USB-webcam microphone. It does not establish that ordinary LG sets automatically upload every household conversation. LG disputes routine ambient recording and describes voice processing as user-triggered. Even within those limits, I want a much clearer account of what gets transcribed, where it sits and when it is deleted. Buying a television should not require a forensic investigation to understand what happens after you speak.

CoinCorner and AnchorWatch bring insured multisig custody to Vault

CoinCorner has launched Vault, with one key held by CoinCorner and the other by AnchorWatch in a different jurisdiction. AnchorWatch builds bitcoin custody infrastructure and provides insurance solutions as a Lloyd's coverholder. Its Trident platform uses multisignature authorization and time-locked recovery paths, giving businesses a way to distribute control and plan for a lost key or unavailable participant. AnchorWatch brings both bitcoin-native custody engineering and insurance expertise to the industry.

For this specific product, CoinCorner says Vault bitcoin is insured through Lloyd's, is not lent out and carries a 1.5% annual fee. The customer does not hold these keys, so understand this as insured custody, not self-custody. Read the policy's coverage and exclusions. Also check the deposit timing: additions after the month's first day enter the Vault balance the following month, while withdrawals first return to the regular CoinCorner balance. Those details matter as much as the launch announcement.

Malone Lam pleads guilty in the $245 million crime enterprise

The Justice Department says Malone Lam pleaded guilty to RICO conspiracy in an enterprise that stole and laundered more than $245 million in cryptocurrency using social engineering. The September 8 plea is a new legal development. The December 8 date is a status hearing, not his sentencing, and the enterprise total should not be confused with a single theft or money recovered for victims.

The attack surface worth thinking about is the person who can authorize a transaction or help somebody regain access to an account. A criminal does not need to break bitcoin's cryptography if they can convince somebody to hand over the means to spend it. An urgent call from supposed support deserves a pause and independent verification, not immediate compliance.

ETF FLOW CHECK

TFTC’s ETF tracker shows $46.6 million of net outflows on September 8, ending the three-session inflow streak. September remains $723.5 million positive, after approximately $1.007 billion came in across September 2-4. Tuesday interrupted the streak without erasing the month’s gains; these flows alone do not establish what caused a move in price.

⚡ FREEDOM TECH CORNER

Crash reports should ask before they leave your phone

Boris Android v1.6.12, the Nostr-native reading and highlighting app, lets you preview a crash report and choose to send, copy or dismiss it. Sending uses an encrypted Nostr message with a one-time key, rather than silently uploading the report. If you use Boris, review those diagnostics before sending: they can include article URLs and device details, so encryption does not make the report anonymous. I would like to see more software make that choice this explicit.

DATA SNAPSHOT

As of September 9, 2026, approximately 10:14 a.m. ET; Bitcoin Lab daily observations dated September 8 UTC

Sources: Coinbase for spot price; mempool.space for network data; Bitcoin Lab for the five daily on-chain valuation and spending metrics. On-chain observations are not live spot readings.

If you found this useful, forward it to a friend who wants to understand what is happening in bitcoin and why it matters. Onward, Marty

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TFTC

podcast: https://www.tftc.io/tag/podcasts/