How would ossification relate to defunding open source devs though? Those don't align. Ossifying does not at all mean we don't need or want developers maintaining or working on #Bitcoin. We could still use a million hours of clean up, just finding ways to lower resource costs, finding and fixing bugs, finding other methods to get syncing full node time way down, etc. Nothing about open source development on bitcoin means its about changing consensus rules.
He’s been explicit and candid about calling for ossification the past few months. Especially on his latest with Livera, in the middle. But TBF, he does make some good points in favor of ossification. https://youtu.be/_QN0RcQFf6w?si=9Tgvb8W3IqdCDnfN
Discussion
The Darth-Saylor narrative Makes zero sense.
I agree, but he might not see it that way. He doesn’t like tinkerers. From his perspective, funding them in *any way* may make them more likely to attempt soft forks that could introduce existential or, at the very least, economic risks. He talks about that at length in the SLP episode.
Him and Weiss have also recently made it clear that they don’t care if Bitcoin is a MoE because they’d rather spend fiat against their Bitcoin collateral, indefinitely. So for them, all they’d care about is base layer settlement if they ever need to move their Bitcoin collateral around to get more spendable fiat debt. Any changes that facilitate scaling are a threat to their moat and, to be fair, may introduce risks to their base layer settlement.
Just because he gets the investment part doesn’t mean he knows as much about Bitcoin as you do. You think he runs a node?