Who are the lying maxis you're talking about?
Tell me how #Bitcoin was centralized until it wasn't, the date when it became decentralized, and what exchanges it was sold at that time when it was centralized.
Discussion
The SEC lies even in court, as seen in the article. Maxis just repeat the lies because they think they benefit from them. Until the SEC or any other part of the State apparatus decides to turn on them, which they will inevitably do.
BTC was totally centralized when it launched, and the distribution was limited to one single individual at first (who presumably still holds 5% of the total max supply), and then to just a few insiders. Not being sold at an exchange where anyone could buy it didn't make it less centralized, but more. That was eventually overcome.
I think the same criteria can be applied to many other projects out there. You can be centralized in the beginning and then become decentralized.
Not that I particularly care about any particular "crypto", because my wealth is stored in BTC. I simply dislike the inconsistency and the maxis' naïveté of thinking that they can ride that monster.
"The SEC lies even in court, as seen in the article. Maxis just repeat the lies because they think they benefit from them. Until the SEC or any other part of the State apparatus decides to turn on them, which they will inevitably do." - again. **I'm a #Bitcoin maxi, I don't repeat lies**. You clearly are not a maxi if you put all maxis into one box.
"BTC was totally centralized when it launched"
Do you mean a worthless software open source code? Why don't you **give me a date of Bitcoin becoming decentralized**?
"and the distribution was limited to one single individual at first" - It wasn't. Satoshi couldn't mine until another node connected to the network. nostr:npub1san22nhe59ct8pstcehav4dtkf94lkn46ltl7d30g3zzl00tg7ussgqjdd was possibly the second node.
"(who presumably still holds 5% of the total max supply)" - the word presumably makes all heavy lifting in your claim. Yet 5% of total supply that never moved and 100% of premined shitcoin is still quite different.
"and then to just a few insiders." - there were no insiders, just people willing to run their computers at 100% to get a worthless token.
"Not being sold at an exchange where anyone could buy it didn't make it less centralized, but more." - are you retarded? Not being traded made #Bitcoin immune.
"I think the same criteria can be applied to many other projects out there. You can be centralized in the beginning and then become decentralized." - the conditions are different, though.
"Not that I particularly care about any particular "crypto", because my wealth is stored in BTC." - I have a feeling, you've a bag, filled with a premined shirtcoin, trying to justify it being centralized and attackable.