The point Saylor makes that he (FDR) “didn’t really seize the gold” and “kick in everybody’s door” is an argument for self-custody rather than against it. Meaning, if you’e held your own gold when Executive Order 6102 was issued, you’d have been fine. But if you’d held your gold with a bank, there would be no way to get it back. You’d have to accept the conversion to fiat. It’s great that the institutions are adopting Bitcoin now, and Saylor deserves credit for leading the way. Institutional adoption of Bitcoin was always going to be a step towards mass adoption. And it is true that certain use cases do require custodians, which is fine so long as users are aware of the trade-offs. But it cannot be overstated that by holding your Bitcoin with trusted third parties, “the main benefits are lost.” Satoshi warns against this in the very first page of the whitepaper. image

Replies (25)

Great counterpoint to all the outrage. Calm and collected. Respect.
Alan ₿'s avatar Alan ₿
The point Saylor makes that he (FDR) “didn’t really seize the gold” and “kick in everybody’s door” is an argument for self-custody rather than against it. Meaning, if you’e held your own gold when Executive Order 6102 was issued, you’d have been fine. But if you’d held your gold with a bank, there would be no way to get it back. You’d have to accept the conversion to fiat. It’s great that the institutions are adopting Bitcoin now, and Saylor deserves credit for leading the way. Institutional adoption of Bitcoin was always going to be a step towards mass adoption. And it is true that certain use cases do require custodians, which is fine so long as users are aware of the trade-offs. But it cannot be overstated that by holding your Bitcoin with trusted third parties, “the main benefits are lost.” Satoshi warns against this in the very first page of the whitepaper. image
View quoted note →
The talk about wild bitcoin and domesticated bitcoin was the thing that triggered me. He was trying to make self custody sound dirt and dangerous.
Bison's avatar
Bison 1 year ago
EO6102 also benefitted from gold not being easily auditable once centralized.
Saylor contradicts himself by claiming how ₿itcoin protects against an inexorable government confiscation @47:18.
MuyMaestro's avatar
MuyMaestro 1 year ago
The banks turned in the gold, not the people...you are lying #saylor
ARVIN's avatar
ARVIN 1 year ago
Trusted 3rd parties are security hoes. image
very few Americans actually held significant amounts of gold at the time. The average person during the Great Depression didn’t have large holdings of gold coins or bullion. The confiscation mainly affected wealthier individuals, banks, and businesses. It was primarily aimed at stopping gold hoarding by financial institutions and individuals with substantial gold holdings. in other words, continue to stack sats and self-custody go the extra mile: get KYC-free BTC when you can. Stop telling people how much Bitcoin you have. Learn about ecash (cashu) and silent payments (sp1) If you comply with everything they tell you to do, they’ll take your Bitcoin - you’ll give it to them. That’s why it’s important to learn how to tell people to go fuck themselves it’s on you to safeguard your property