In the part where BlackRock explains the 21 million supply, it says "There is no guarantee that bitcoin's 21 million supply cap will not be changed". In my opinion, this means that BlackRock indirectly or directly wants to change Bitcoin's consensus, I don't know by what means or by putting pressure on the Bitcoin Core devs.
In any case, we know very well and there's no point in coming up with an excuse that you don't know, that BlackRock controls many companies around the world together with Vanguard, it has almost 100% of the planet in its hands.
My theory is:
- Force a change in the consensus, creating real Bitcoin vs. BTCBK (Bitcoin BlackRock)
- Use ETFs as a way to control price manipulation and much more.
- Lobby using Exchanges and companies as the main factor against the devs.
In any case, let's keep an eye on what the owners of the largest companies are indirectly trying to do with Bitcoin.
Controlling a lot of coin doesn't give them a leg up in changing anything, quite the opposite as change would be a risk to their existing business... maybe this is a warning from them that the price of Bitcoin is eternal vigilance?
It's evident that there's already a coordinated attack to increase supply:
Could you elaborate on this point? I'm not sure how switching to millisats would resemble a supply increase. Or maybe I am misunderstanding your post. Lost in translation and all.
There's 2 ways to look at supply:
I think it's fair to say that no self-interested Bitcoiner would actually change #1 because it would be dilutive to their holdings... The second is a bit more insidious because people generally can't extrapolate or think strategically more than 5 minutes out.
Increasing base units would necessitate change on effectively every piece of Bitcoin software, one "harmless" hard fork to prove such a HF is possible then opens the door to others.
The increased divisibility might actually have the potential to address (idiotic) concerns around self-custodial attainability for mud farmers, but with unpredictable trade-offs around mining/mempool incentives, transaction fees, block subsidy, and switching costs.
Nonsense.
view on www.youtube.comWatch this and learn the truth.
Don't have any original thoughts there AI bot?
Ripped through the vid at 2x to see if there was anything of substance, as predicted, 0
Just more weak virtue signaling by someone that at some point started shitcoining so hard they forgot what Bitcoin is
Legalese bolierplate to cover their asses, nothing more
In what sense?
so that investors can't sue them if the cap is increased somehow eventually. same as "past returns don't guarantee future performance" type of crap.
All filings with SEC contain legalese especially IPO prospectus which outlines every possible risk no matter how infinitesimal
No one would invest if they actually read and believed legalese boilerplate.
True
I would love to trade BTCBK for bitcoin.