pull down to refresh
1 sat \ 2 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 28 Dec 2024 \ on: 100k and Counting: The Revolution Beyond The Price bitcoin
Completely agree.
Unfortunately, most Bitcoiners are not even aware of this.
Worse still, even if they were, many wouldn't care...they only care about NGU.
Indeed! This is also the problem with some of Michael Saylor's points of Bitcoin being "digital capital or a digital hotel in cyberspace" while ignoring the medium of exchange function, which is the reason bitcoin exists in the first place.
reply
Yes Saylor assists the bankers cartel strategy of increasing institutional custody (where it is not and cannot be used as a p2p MoE) capture and control and reinforces the narrative of Bitcoin as a speculative commodity, not a P2P payments protocol.
This narrative renders Bitcoin harmless to fiats MoE hegemony which is a basis of fiat monetary power.
Coinbase (where Saylor holds his BTC) now holds over 10% of all Bitcoin.
At current rates more than half of Bitcoin will be held under US institutional custody by 2030.
Bitcoin as a P2P payments protocol has been successfully obstructed by the legacy fiat operators.
They don't need to implement an order 6102฿ as long as Bitcoin MoE use is so successfully constricted . . . but with ever growing institutional custody the efficacy of and potential rationale for any Order 6102฿ (if ever needed) is equally increased.
reply