I'm not saying controlling 1 out of 150 coins is controlling Bitcoin.
It's not. Far from it. That's the beauty of Proof of Work over Proof of Stake, of course.
I'm just saying that it's not good for the exchange rate.
Someone controlling 10% of the liquid supply of any other commodity (i.e. oil) is neither good for its price, as it could allow for market manipulation.
1/150 is less than 1% of total supply.. again exchange rate in the short term (if someone dumps their stack on the market price go down for a day) is not fundamental to bitcoin being decentralized
Again, it's not about the total supply, but about the liquid supply.
I'm not saying that at this level Saylor stack is a risk for bitcoin. Far from it.
But it's not something good for bitcoin either.
Bitcoin is much stronger as its more distributed among more and more people.
Bitcoin is your enemy's money.
The liquid supply is the supply on exchanges though. Liquid supply is being eaten up and distributed by hodlers. There will be much larger fish than Saylor but this would just make the supply more illiquid and price will go up.
Exactly.
The supply will become more and more illiquid as time goes, so people controlling a big stake nowadays will get more and more percentage of the liquid supply.
And I don't consider it as something good.
Can I do something about it? Of course not.
Does it change bitcoin features and decentralisation? Of course not.
Does it suppose a risk for bitcoin? I don't think so.
Is it something good for bitcoin? Not really.
That's all.
