The money in your bank account isn’t truly yours. The cash you physically hold isn’t truly yours either.
The Bitcoin you have on an exchange or an ETF isn’t truly yours. But the Bitcoin you hold yourself is your money.
Discussion
Self-custody = no permission needed
Do you have a link to the article?
thanks for the actual link!
What would a goverment know about property, all they have is coerced by force or the product of usury.
At the same time as Jerome Powell is saying we can trust the banks to custody the people’s bitcoin 👀
Yeah right! Everyone wants your stack!
Microstrategy’s Bitcoin isn’t truly theirs
It’s not to do with truly, it 100% isn’t yours. Sats on your keys is yours but they’ll still try and take it, because they’re thieving cunts
nostr:note1k9a90zp66csj4x8v2as4r7ntwem3cngttwwj39nlcmnxctpkwp7qk4l4fl
Fiat money in a bank is like storing shit in a fridge. #bitcoin
That is an insult to shit and fridges
Who didn't know that ?
#Currency is just a promissory note ..
#askNostr
Bitcoin isn't property either.
it is for whoever can sign the transaction
That doesn't make it property. A signature is just a message.
why are the private keys that allow you to sign the message and transfer value not an asset ?
I think the private keys, a secret bit of information, are an asset, but that is very different than saying bitcoin is property. You do not transfer or otherwise share the secrets in any way in order to publish a transaction message. And bitcoin is just pure information copied on everyone's node. That's very different from property. Maybe it's intellectual property, but I don't think so.
Another reason to dump their worthless paper.
nostr:note1kus454sh04e7fe940296myywrqyjwtyrazxdtgqhlfptf0tjjhpsmdm6d8
it has to be an 'asset' as they define it because it is their liability but is not truly yours and is inferior. bearer asset with self-custody wins
Is that how the authorities argued? You can't make that up! Haha