What actually breaks my Bitcoin containment thesis

TL;DR

Containment relies on perimeters (banks, app stores, clouds, pools, payment networks), not just statutes. The only way out is either (a) make those perimeters look less safe than BTC, or (b) align powerful actors’ incentives (energy, megacaps, reserves) with BTC’s success.

Bottom line: Most days, containment holds — that’s the revealed preference. But I wanted to explore what actually breaks it: trust failures at the core, public censorship optics, paper custody failure, sovereign hedging, capital controls, CBDC backfires, or a client-level schism.

More context: