An attack would require them to deeply understand the decentralized nature of the protocol. They are seeing it as an investment vehicle. Let them play.
Discussion
Exactly, and they’d have to start running nodes and mining to even have a chance of attacking.
They’re building a product to derive value from bitcoin. Even if they did understand the protocol deeply enough, they still wouldn’t attack because it would hurt the value they’re trying to derive. Deriving value from bitcoin is the exact opposite of attacking it. The incentives to attack just don’t align at all with starting an investment vehicle to derive value. They’re diametrically opposed positions. It’s the same game theory satoshi talked about.
Basically, BlackRockCoin ain’t happening.
https://nostr.build/av/b6e3f643dfd91297365dacae9d45d513331f3def8d5b68ccbf9629c8c1132dce.mp4
It's different from this. This isn't about new hash power being created.
This is being existing hash power and nodes switching because of price pressure.
In what scenario would price pressure cause them to switch?
What if blackrock ETF is $1T, they fork and say this is right chain. Obviously all the regulated companies will switch like exchanges. Maybe the KYC miners will switch which causes pressure on the price of the real chain.
This is just me speculating.
Implausible.
If Blackrock makes their own fork, the shitcoin would likely be a security and they’d be subject to all sorts of liability that wouldn’t have existed before that. That would also be a $1T gamble that no sane company would make, especially if they already recognize bitcoins value - which they do, because they’re making an etf. The incentives just do not align. Why launch an etf, which is specifically made to derive value from an asset, and then try to undermine that asset via placing a massive bet that everyone will just follow you over to you’re centralized security token.