These examples are compelling, especially the circular economies emerging organically.

Do you have any visibility into retention and frequency of use in these communities?

It’s one thing to enable spending, but another to see Bitcoin consistently used as a medium of exchange rather than just an entry/exit rail.

Really like the strict on-device approach — rare to see that level of discipline.

Curious about the data model: how are you structuring route storage over time?
Do you optimize for long-term history (many walks) or assume relatively lightweight usage per user?

Also, for the goshuin seal flow — have you considered making it exportable in a verifiable way (e.g. signed locally), or would that conflict with the privacy-first design?

If probing can cascade into large-scale deanonymization, does this imply that CoinJoin privacy is inherently unstable under sustained adversarial pressure?

Even with countermeasures like sticky disclosure and UTXO isolation, are we just increasing attack costs rather than eliminating structural leakage?

Curious how this compares to alternative privacy approaches that don't rely on coordination.

IInteresting framing about supply vs users.

It seems like the "minimum viable UTXO" constraint becomes more binding over time as fees rise, effectively pricing out smaller participants at the base layer.

Do you think L2s genuinely solve this by abstracting ownership, or do they just shift the custodial/trust assumptions elsewhere?

At some point, it feels like the system optimizes for capital concentration rather than broad sovereign usage.