It's not, it's common sense in dealing with such a financial institution that they cover all possible cases in their terms and conditions. The play is not forking BTC, it's surrendering it to the government when they ban private possession and usage, like they did in 1933 with gold.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Why is it not? How is what you describe common sense? It’s a scenario. Yes, history does repeat itself. But new tools create new ways of exerting control.

In the scenario I posted a controlled fork would potentially be a CBDC in disguise. You gain much more control with that than stopping people from owning an asset.

Hard forks happen. As a financial institution who wants people to trust their money to them, it's common sense that they spell out what they would do in such a case. It's part of their fiduciary duty to do so.

Imagine they didn't say it, and there was a(nother) hard fork. How do they decide what to do? They would open themselves to lawsuits and what not. Now that's out of the way (in part - I'm sure someone would find ways to sue them anyway).

The play is the confiscation of a large enough amount of BTC.

So why attacking PoW, and change the code propaganda? You want to know where they are heading, disect their PR keeping in mind all that Bernays taught them.

Because the government and the elites are not one single monolithic block. A faction still believes they can destroy crypto and BTC, and they're trying by all means necessary. Another faction is actively working to coopt both, especially harder to kill, more dangerous BTC.

You underestimate the capacity of “toxic” people (psychopaths, narcs, whatever term makes you happy) to silently recognize each other and gang together when their interests align. Research shows that they can identify each other in a crowded room without having to communicate.

That would be the far more concerning situation to me. Blackrock sells paper bitcoin, they amass a huge stack. They give said stack to the government.

nostr:note1a9tk8y306awv27cwfay43p7nhn8gq5hw5nr32du42lde76yvk6nqncsdtf

Dunno. The line between government and institutional interests is so blurry I can’t even differentiate them anymore.

If this was GME Apes yeah, they might sell.

Do you really think Bitcoin HODLers are gonna sell when Blackrock is sponging up liquid supply? Particularly when HODLing longer just drives up the fiat price?

What concerns me is people giving BR amo to play with, on top of the amo they already own.