First off, these are generic, broad concerns that apply to various degrees perpetually, but “ETFs are here and Bitcoin treasuries have captured bitcoin” aren’t explained by just listing possible ways in which influence *could* be used.
Decentralization isn’t the absence of means of influence, it’s when a system has so many variant ways that influence can be both used and then defended against, that no single avenue dominates unilaterally.
That said I’ll give a few caveats about the ones you bring up anyway:
1. Holding bitcoin doesn’t not mean control over the protocol or network. And there’s no major concern about the current distribution. Institutions were always going to be here at some point.
2. This is a boogie man very often carried out that is based on common ignorance about markets and what “manipulation” actually is.
3. This has nothing to do with any of the above. It’s just its own issue and I talk about it constantly because it’s actually a problem that exists and is tangible.
4. Regulations have gone lax. I’m more concerned of complacency because things are going our way on that front.
In short, you just listed generic ways in which there is influence over various elements of the social sphere or of the various infrastructure used by businesses or institutions. But this is a vast chasm away from “bitcoin has been captured.”
I never made the claim that there aren’t dozens of players who could influence things, who operate various parts of the infrastructure, or that there are certain jurisdictions that can set some standards for good or bad - to the contrary that’s exactly what I am and have argued and talk about all the time. But I’m talking about people who literally say “ETFs have bought some bitcoin, bitcoins treasury companies are buying some, therefore bitcoin is captured.”
And I’m pointing out, correctly, that this is a nonsense take, and isn’t anything of substance.
————
If none of this is getting through, I’ll use an analogy:
- Let’s say we’ve been talking about various risks to bitcoin mining for years. We have real conversations about which pools present which risks, which jurisdictions pose concerns, which protocols allow for block hijacking, etc. Actual substance around the mining problem.
- Blackrock makes a mining pool that gets a few percent of the hashrate. Say 10%
- People just start instantly claiming Blackrock destroyed Bitcoin. It’s captured, we’re screwed, 51% attacks. The end.
- I ask for what the various risks and likelihood are.
- Someone screams at me like I’m retarded and says “DUH They’ll 51% attack you moron!”
- I say, well yeah but that’s a vague category of thing that CAN happen, you have presented no *substance* here as to how Blackrock now has control over everything.
This is what I’m getting at. There’s this weird religion that people who hate Wall Street have, who actually seem to “anti worship” them. They think they are evil, but importantly, they think they are evil *gods* who have total control over whatever they involve themselves in by virtue or simply showing up. And they can’t seem to grasp that they’ve said nothing at all.
