Many bitcoiners think establishment powers are now in the "and then they join you" phase of the struggle. I don't. I think they're more entering the earlier "and then they fight you" phase. Or more specifically, they are happy to join in on the price exposure side (i.e. ETFs), but they are fighting against privacy (especially) and self-custody (to some extent). The struggle for financial privacy, custody, and overall self-autonomy is just heating up. The gradual shift of critics from "bitcoin is a useless speculative asset with no intrinsic value" to "bitcoin is so powerful that direct usage of it must be curtailed" can be dangerous. image

Replies (92)

VEN's avatar
VEN 1 year ago
I don't think they are fighting to be honest. Most bitcoiners mentality does it for them. If you read the white paper then look at how much the majority has strayed, they are already playing along with the agenda.
Kinda thinking any KYC stack is vulnerable, even in self-custody. There is always leverage that can be carefully applied by psychopathic control freaks.
I absolutely think the fiat empire is attacking us from multiple fronts. Legally, they're targeting mixers and self-custody, They are acquiring controlling interests in mining companies. They are pushing for a paper Bitcoin ETF, likely to reduce it to a mere ornament, a shiny harmless gold rock. Maybe I'm being overly paranoid, but I don't accept that all these events occurring at once are mere coincidences. I believe the fiat empire is attacking us in a very strategic manner, and we cannot let them prevail.
Are you saying they want to control bitcoin by regulating the heck out of it to the ground ?
Default avatar
Exodia38 1 year ago
"bitcoin is a speculative asset with no intrinsic value"
The root word of exposure is expose. Many normies will regret buying ETFs after all this war plays out.
I'm also of the opinion that the fight is only just beginning. And I suspect we will see more government involvement as it becomes apparent that too many plebs will have a seat at the new table.
Agree. The ignorant, angry, FUD-ladened reader comments on any, always slanted, New York Times article about Bitcoin show how far we still have to go.
I obey the state’s laws because I risk losing things I value if I didn’t. In those cases when my moral obligations match with their laws, it’s purely coincidental.
Roger that. It all started in 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act (as I'm sure you know). Anyone thinking they will be going down without a knock out battle(s) are not thinking clearly. Hope, I'm around when Bitcoin wins.
100% this. Wall Street is here to rake fees and manipulate the price. Fees on ETF, fees on derivatives, fees on inflows and outflows. They are absolutely NOT “with you” in the revolution for a better money. Wall Street is FIAT incarnate. They are not stupid. They have the most to lose on a Bitcoin Standard. We’ll enjoy years of slow chop now.
I think we have some people. Like RFK, sen Cynthia L, Tucker Carlson, saying the quiet parts out loud, but yea the folks that stand to loose the most from a bitcoin standard is precisely the reason we need one to begin with… we will make them pay. Can’t stop an idea whose time has come. #ruleswithoutrulers
Bitcoin ETFs will bring the liquidity required by wealthy and tech-savvy individuals to escape the fiscal trap. The plebs will purchase assets managed by banks, which will manipulate the prices, exciting the masses and pocketing the fees. On the other side, the Godlike kings will continue to tax the harvest of the Volga as usual, selling them the dream of protection and social welfare, much as the priest sells a piece of Paradise or pensions fund. History just rhymes.
I could care less honestly, Bitcoiners know what's coming. It is inevitable. I won't be giving the state more attention by fearing or worrying about each step it makes. Bitcoin cannot be stoped and I won't be stopped from using it. Let the sovereign individual play out and live your life. View quoted note →
frphank's avatar
frphank 1 year ago
The government also regulates gambling. That doesn't make casino chips a viable currency.
Do you think getting exposure/participation is going to move the needle? Like, can you see a situation where companies/countries defect from authoritarian tendencies because the incentives make it better for them to do so? I can see the game theory predicting that in certain situations.
Bitcoin is intrinsically subversive and and threatening to fiat dictators. There is a money-printing-political-patroange machine in cahoots with an influential industry (Wall Street, Financial Advisors) of specialists who help the wealthy preserve their savings by buying their products. They will not go obsolete without a fight.
I'm super black-pilled on the privacy bit. It feels like all hope is lost to achieve any meaningful on-chain improvements for privacy now that the ETF BlackRock suits are on board.
This sounds right, but might it be a futile fight on their part? Imagine creating a weapon that if you fight it, the fighting itself only strengthens it. How do you fight something like that? Maybe they are only still fighting because they don’t know what they’re up against and that they’ve already lost. View quoted note →
agree. I think there's a lot more to come. I'm not sure even if every technical problems is solved.
Spepe's avatar
Spepe 1 year ago
It’s called adversarial interoperability. Must be careful what we wish for
Keith Ammon's avatar
Keith Ammon 1 year ago
Investors in Bitcoin ETFs commit funds based on the fundamental value proposition of Bitcoin. If custodians act against the inherent characteristics that confer value to Bitcoin's native network token, they breach their fiduciary duty.
The key to maintaining our privacy is by educating about why it is important. Calling for "rights" is simply not enough because it is a philosophical argument. Nobody in a power struggle cares about philosophy and sadly, until we meet everyone's needs UNCONDITIONALLY, we are all in a power struggle. Instead we need to educate about fundamental human needs so as to get everyone to understand that psychological needs are as real and tangible as physical needs and that if we don't meet them human beings will inevitably develop pathologies and become sick and a problem for everyone else to have to deal with. Fundamental human needs aren't infinit wims or fickle desires, they are few and the same for all people, they are based on scientific biological evidence and can be precisely determined despite being more complex than physical metrics.
The push to delegitimize all crypto but BTC is an attempt to control crypto from becoming the truly liberating and wealth creating technology is it.
CBDC's 15min Cities Surveillance camreas everywhere Social Credit Score And so on... It isn't hard to see, that there is no place for privacy...don't you dare to think, you end up free & independently. It sounds better when it rhymes, doesn't it? 🤷‍♂️😅
Jeff 's avatar
Jeff 1 year ago
This is what I was wondering, whether it had failed or succeeded in the Mandibles. It was a fictional story though…
Jeff 's avatar
Jeff 1 year ago
Definitely in the “they fight you” stage. We’re too early for winning. Great things don’t come easily, and certainly take a bit of time.
There will be plenty of people using self custody to hinder Government. I also believe the ETF will raise awareness of Self Custody. Time will tell, but I have already had conversations with people, "Why would you self custody when you can just buy the ETF?" That conversation nearly always leads to 'entertaining' self custody. Self Custody is VERY HARD for the average person to understand. Most see money in a bank as theirs - available anytime. They do NOT even know the US Government confiscated Gold in 1933. It's a process of education.
Lyn was right.
Lyn Alden's avatar Lyn Alden
Many bitcoiners think establishment powers are now in the "and then they join you" phase of the struggle. I don't. I think they're more entering the earlier "and then they fight you" phase. Or more specifically, they are happy to join in on the price exposure side (i.e. ETFs), but they are fighting against privacy (especially) and self-custody (to some extent). The struggle for financial privacy, custody, and overall self-autonomy is just heating up. The gradual shift of critics from "bitcoin is a useless speculative asset with no intrinsic value" to "bitcoin is so powerful that direct usage of it must be curtailed" can be dangerous. image
View quoted note →
They will let us have a Store of Value; they’ll maybe let us have a Unit of Account; but they will take all measures to stop us having a Medium of Exchange.
Fun thing is, everything the critics say „just speculation, no intrinsic value, gambling, energy wasting“ is exactly what tradfi wants bitcoin to be. Without self custody, without being money, without PoW bitcoin really has no „intrinsic value“, because being fuckyou-money IS the value proposition.
Good, privacy should be an opt in feature. If privacy is on the base layer verification is difficult or impossible. Proof of reserves is no longer feasible. Some entities should be acting publicly. Bitcoin with layers flips traditional banking, in which the individuals have no privacy but the institutions can move invisibly behind the scenes.
Kaizen's avatar
Kaizen 1 year ago
Agree, Lyn. The “then they fight you” phase is barely getting started. Gonna be a bumpy ride.
Default avatar
Jim C 1 year ago
You’re not paranoid. Only reason they would allow the ETFs and Blackrock would be pushing it is if they are confident it’s in their control and it benefits them. While it may serve as an alternative to gold, they are confident BTC will never be a medium exchange that is private and uncensorable except maybe for a tiny fringe.
Citizen's avatar
Citizen 1 year ago
Yes, feel the same way. Need to innovate quickly on decentralized privacy.
closed's avatar
closed 1 year ago
Só precisamos de um país!
I agree it’s not as great as it’s made out to be. But, as a beach read? Sure, it was sufficiently entertaining. What are your favorites for near-future fiction?
Alex's avatar
Alex 1 year ago
How important do you think the next election result is interns of Bitcoin pushback and hostility?
Cobweb's avatar
Cobweb 1 year ago
None. Trump isn't pro-bitcoin.
So is this the bit where America citizens use all those weapons stored up? I mean I thought the whole vibe was to stop tyranny.
The central bank empire wants the price of Bitcoin to go up, because it makes layer 1 transactions expensive. Then they can push you to custodial layer 2 that’s easier to regulate and control.
Romans used assimilation to achieve Romanisation.
Lyn Alden's avatar Lyn Alden
Many bitcoiners think establishment powers are now in the "and then they join you" phase of the struggle. I don't. I think they're more entering the earlier "and then they fight you" phase. Or more specifically, they are happy to join in on the price exposure side (i.e. ETFs), but they are fighting against privacy (especially) and self-custody (to some extent). The struggle for financial privacy, custody, and overall self-autonomy is just heating up. The gradual shift of critics from "bitcoin is a useless speculative asset with no intrinsic value" to "bitcoin is so powerful that direct usage of it must be curtailed" can be dangerous. image
View quoted note →