Game Theory: How Governments could delegitimize Bitcoin Maximalism
Shrink “Bitcoin-as-movement” into “Bitcoin-as-managed-product”. Don’t ban it; brand and bound it.
nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqvtw30knexxgwasss0qwafnz68hdx6u25xwpclsz4750ez46qpx2qyt8wumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qpqkwctdv5khg6r9dae8jttgdamj6em0wejhymndv4h8guedvdhh2mry94jx2mr9va5hg6tdd9ax2ttzd96xxmmfdckk6ctcd9kkzmrfwdkswaemu4
A masterclass of adversarial thinking
How do you see the dynamic between central banks with their CBDCs, and noncentral banks perhaps fighting back with their own stablecoins? Will noncentral banks have to on-board onto BTC in order to compete/survive CBDCs? Not sure how to present this question. There's a dynamic here that will have to play out somehow. Perhaps you address it in one of your articles? Thanks.
Great question. They don't compete because public banks are really just a proxy for central banks.
There are probably 10 public banks that matter (too big to fail ones) and they'll do just fine in the new regime because they are needed.
Programmable money rails (stablecoins → CBDCs → tokenized deposits)
Why private companies are used: State wants programmability without wearing every error; card networks/clouds absorb blame, scale UX.
Levers: Treasury/central-bank pilots, tax/VAT split at source, merchant MDR incentives, wallet whitelists.
Proxies: V/MA/ADYEY, FIS/FISV/GPN, COIN (custody/stable infra), MSFT (identity + anti-fraud), banks with tokenized deposit pilots (JPM).
The Controllers outsource switches (identity, provenance, programmability, audit, revocation) to public companies.
There is no fight/competition, it's all coordinated.
More context: https://controlplanecapital.substack.com/p/why-the-controllers-use-public-companies
