11. Use coinbase custody solutions ™️ and do not hold your own keys
Discussion
12. Trust everything you hear in the media.
😂 mstr is a publicly traded company and they have to disclose who their custodians are. Of which one of them is coinbase. Mstr doesn’t hold keys.
Not a good look simping for Saylor. Hope you figure it out.
Being a publicly traded company, I’d think they use that for regulatory purposes. However, Saylor himself uses self custody.
In any case, I think Saylor is doing a tremendous amount of good. You can think I am a simp. I don’t care. I hope you figure it out.
Supporting and utilizing a known enemy of Bitcoin (coinbase) is unforgivable imo. He’s a smart guy but feels very fiat. Bitcoin mag friend and non key holder - that’s a big no from me dawg. He’s going to do what he does but is no idol.
I can see what you are saying, but it doesn’t seem as black and white to me.
Since we don’t see things the same way, I’m genuinely curious, what would you have done differently if you were in his position?
I would’ve had MSTR create a proprietary multi sig setup and distributed / held keys responsibly. With their resources they could setup something completely secure and result. Maybe let unchained hold one key. And a couple other major institutions preferably in different nation state jurisdictions to diffuse state confiscation risk. Would’ve made addresses public as they were acquired for transparency and so shareholders could verify their claim per share of total MSTR holdings at any time. And I would have MSTR run public nodes that all tx’s were broadcast from.
You would expect them to be able to outrun counter party risk right? And we can’t see their insurance and or disclosures from coinbase either. Maybe it’s a multigsig setup, perhaps there proof or reserves included in the deal etc. Bit too quick to say its a bad setup by definition. Im happy they went for it when they did and the way they did it