Isn’t this what everyone does in the case of a hard fork? Makes a choice about which bitcoin is the real one?
Discussion
The existence of the clause (if true) is sus. Yes, in case of fork we chose. Why are you already preparing for it? “Reserve the right” of doing what I will be forced to do. Don’t get it…
It's not, it's common sense in dealing with such a financial institution that they cover all possible cases in their terms and conditions. The play is not forking BTC, it's surrendering it to the government when they ban private possession and usage, like they did in 1933 with gold.
Why is it not? How is what you describe common sense? It’s a scenario. Yes, history does repeat itself. But new tools create new ways of exerting control.
In the scenario I posted a controlled fork would potentially be a CBDC in disguise. You gain much more control with that than stopping people from owning an asset.
Hard forks happen. As a financial institution who wants people to trust their money to them, it's common sense that they spell out what they would do in such a case. It's part of their fiduciary duty to do so.
Imagine they didn't say it, and there was a(nother) hard fork. How do they decide what to do? They would open themselves to lawsuits and what not. Now that's out of the way (in part - I'm sure someone would find ways to sue them anyway).
The play is the confiscation of a large enough amount of BTC.
So why attacking PoW, and change the code propaganda? You want to know where they are heading, disect their PR keeping in mind all that Bernays taught them.
Because the government and the elites are not one single monolithic block. A faction still believes they can destroy crypto and BTC, and they're trying by all means necessary. Another faction is actively working to coopt both, especially harder to kill, more dangerous BTC.
That would be the far more concerning situation to me. Blackrock sells paper bitcoin, they amass a huge stack. They give said stack to the government.
nostr:note1a9tk8y306awv27cwfay43p7nhn8gq5hw5nr32du42lde76yvk6nqncsdtf
Dunno. The line between government and institutional interests is so blurry I can’t even differentiate them anymore.
If this was GME Apes yeah, they might sell.
Do you really think Bitcoin HODLers are gonna sell when Blackrock is sponging up liquid supply? Particularly when HODLing longer just drives up the fiat price?
Yeah. That’s sort of true but lawyers are paid to think of all eventualities.
You said lawyers and my level of trust dropped significantly. 🤣
I am just playing mind games with a mind that has by now a tendency to expect the worse from everyone.
I’m 100% in agreement but better to remember that that is what’s happening. Everyone and every institution has incentives. Best to try and understand what those are and how they’ll play out rather than wish it wasn’t so.
Exactly what happened with Bitcoin Cash, they would create a new shitcoin. In such scenario, we would rekt Blackrock (or they would rekt themselves) just by continuing to use Bitcoin. Blackrock underestimating all the other users of the network would learn the hard way.
In all honesty, it depends on what narrative becomes the dominant one. We got work to do plebs. We need to tell the real story
If you hold IOUs you dont care. If you use Bitcoin today, you would never agree to use state coin instead. So good luck convincing each and every pleb 😂
“If you use Bitcoin”
There you go. More people need to use Bitcoin. Nostr fixes this
If one understands the value inherent in bitcoin they would never choose to use a fork created by the very state they wish to avoid. Yes, the state has unlimited resources, and can be convincing and people are gullible, yet more and more people are educating themselves and buying btc. It won’t change just because blackrock has a fork. The state has been using everything it has already, and it hasn’t worked. I could be wrong, but I would not bet against the plebs.
Bitcoin doesn’t need #nostr. Nostr needs #Bitcoin.