All that "may” happen, or it may not. I won’t take the black pill over “may”.
And at some point, you have to believe in the power of the technology over the power of the state. Otherwise, the experiment was always going to fail.
nostr:note1vl2khgack5mnwecv8h55lmfz8xkl0agqrprj3q47qmtem6pa6fyqnus5gw
Slippery slope fallacious garbage rhetoric. This chick has proven to be a poor critical thinker and also not understand Bitcoin at any reasonable depth time and again. No clue why anyone follows her or takes her seriously. Midwit through and through.
Yeah, I don't follow her, but just take the fucking W once in a while!
I like this take. I think Lola identifies a non-zero risk, but it's partially motivated by a false dichotomy of NGU bros vs. pure freedom tech advocates. Many are both, and Bitcoin benefits from both no matter how distasteful you find one.
It would be even worse if the EO was to ban or restrict it in some way. Yes it would make it more cypherpunk and cool, but zooming out this seems like a much more obvious step to becoming the world's money (even if the wording offends you).
Thanks — I think there’s a cohort (which I understand because I have elements of it myself) that swallowed the black pill wholeheartedly, can’t take a W, for whom paranoia is part of their identity. For them, being dissident, poor and secretive is preferable to the world embracing hard money at every scale. I am not speaking about the author per se, I don’t know her, but the post reads that way to me.
The simplest, most obvious inference if the US creates a strategic reserve is the world is switching to hard money from soft, and all the catastrophic consequences from printing are about to end or at least be significantly curtailed. If you can’t be happy about that, maybe it’s because you don’t want to be happy about anything.
Again, maybe the author is not like this, but I get that sense from some posters here, and while I’ve been wont to share it at times in my life, I’m mostly over it.
