I thought it was pretty good actually.

Without proof of liability, proof of reserve is just feel-good virtue signaling. Dismissing the potential known and unknown downsides of making all the addresses public is shortsighted imo. The only people complaining about this are the same people that tell others not to invest and to only buy Bitcoin and hold in self-custody. He even tells people to just buy Bitcoin and self-custody. The people complaining about this non-issue should follow his advice. Everyone else who is already trusting the team at Strategy to execute has no issues trusting various auditors to verify the assets and liabilities are what the company says they are.

Despite what OPs think, Saylor doesn’t want to share a cell with SBF.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

proof of reserves are one piece of due diligence, liabilities still need to be audited

if the public had demanded ftx publish proof of reserves it would have been obvious they had way less bitcoin than they said they did even without proof of liabilities

anyway, im not complaining, there will be plenty of mstr competitors that publish proof of reserves, metaplanet already does, he will likely do it to as well to compete and individuals can always buy real bitcoin directly instead

>He doesn’t know he is the OP shilling stonks.

Cringe