Yeah i see what ur saying

I agree that's what we have going on with bitcoin -- it can work entirely independently. Separating money and state, etc. Realizing Hal's vision, but entirely independent of the banks thanks to LN L2s etc.

But despite this, what perhaps Saylor is saying, in a way echoing Hal, is that for bitcoin to "scale" across the millions in developed countries, ushering it into the systems that everyone's already accustomed to using is the way that bitcoin adoption takes place in these countries.

Doesn't mean that's where bitcoin stays, which i where I took disagreement from them. The largest nation state growing right now, the decentralized internet, will steamroll all these fiat state solutions we have.

But before we get there, that's probably what the "growth stage" will look like in developed countries, whether we like that or not. I think Saylor realistically points that out, and spot ETFs scream that's the likely scenario here too. But we shouldnt be spooked, bitcoin was built to withstand the attack. But to think it'll avoid the attack entirely is unrealistic (imo)