pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 6 replies \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears 2 Apr \ on: INTRUDER ALERT! - Shitcoiner at the Meetup bitcoin
Man, even most of the shitcoiners I've run into (or, um, been in my less-knowledgable days) still take a "not your keys, not your coins" approach. Being anti-self-custody just seem like a weird choice, but maybe custodial lightning is a good point of entry?
At the end of the day, this particular guy was really anti-debasement but not concerned about censorship and seizure. This is why I personally believe (you can never really know what's going on in someone else's brain, right?) he was being honest and intellectually consistent.
reply
Anti debasement and crypto don’t align really. You’re moving from a central bank of fiat economists to a central bank of developers.
Even if he is an Eth maxi the rules around issuance resemble similar central planning as Jpow
reply
Yup. He was definitely inconsistent in that sense. Seems like a good way to put it too. Vitalek Buterin or Charles Hoskinson become the central bankers.
reply
Good point, and one I should remember more often -- there are many reasons people are involved in BTC and/or crypto, and I shouldn't make assumptions.
reply
I'm still not saying he was right. He was most certainly wrong and I pushed back hard on the Coinbase thing. I told the tragic tales of FTX, Voyager, and Celcius. I'm just saying, he seemed to still truly believe that wasn't a legit concern.
reply
If he is concerned only about debasement then he should be very concerned about the need to self custody. Every bank in the history of the world has debased the money it held on behalf of its customers. Self custody is the only tool we have against debasement. If all the bitcoin was held on exchanges those exchanges could sell has much paper bitcoin as they wanted and it would make bitcoin worthless, even ignoring the lake of censorship resistance and seizure resistance leaving the money on an exchange would cause.
reply