Fair to say that nostr:npub1mznweuxrjm423au6gjtlaxmhmjthvv69ru72t335ugyxtygkv3as8q6mak points aren’t lost on any bitcoiner. But I think it is also important to remember that BPI is writing to a specific audience, policy makers whose job is to think about what is in the country’s best interest. Matt Pines is one of Bitcoin’s most effective advocates on the policy front. I think in this piece he is speaking to policy makers in a language they understand. And he articulates the case for the SBR as well as anyone.

Zooming out, if we accept the basic premise that actions are determined largely by incentives, we must consider that should an SBR be realized, and thus bitcoin were to become part of the larger policy-making machine, the incentives that optimize bitcoin’s strengths would ultimately influence that policy making machine.

We talk a lot about how the perverted incentives of the fiat system have caused a litany of problems, all well discussed by Bitcoiners. We often refer to Bitcoin as the “apex predator” that will consume the traditional financial system and break all the models. If we believe that, we should be looking for ways to make bitcoin a larger part of the overall financial system, to find ways for it to take root in the political consciousness of policy makers.

There are perfectly reasonable arguments among friends about the merits of the SBR. Having spent a few years in government, I understand how incentives push policy makers toward positions, good and bad. If we are confident in Bitcoin’s promise to rebuild the incentives of a broken system in a more fair manner, I offer that bringing bitcoin into the heart of that system offers the best opportunity to realize that opportunity.

nostr:note1ymqvptavp0fkq0clu3n5guajay35epmexmh7564ke66xwhkfhjrs927njg