Not that I've seen. Absolutely beyond the pale if true, but uh, need some receipts.
I have never once simped saylor, he obviously has his own motivations (making money) which seems incongruous with this. I can construct an explanation why he might have done this, but it would seem implausible or at least unlikely.
How does making money seem incongruous with this? If bitcoin never had another update, would Saylor make less money?
Almost certainly yes.
1. Medium of Exchange usage increases demand for Bitcoin (improving MoE requires development)
2. Software requires maintenance
3. ossificiation means the eventual death of Bitcoin
I know some debate 3 (they're wrong), 1 and 2 are self evident.
I could see a strategy where Saylor intends to capture Bitcoin and become an intermediary, but that defeats Bitcoin's core value proposition and that would (eventually) destroy it.
If Saylor disagrees with 1 I don't know what to say, he's wrong, unless it's part of a larger strategy like I posited.
As it stands, bitcoin is much better digital property than it is a currency competing with the dollar for global reserve status. That's right in line with his thesis. Bitcoin devs focusing on scaling and privacy have the goal of making it better currency. A lot of speculation on my part though 🤷
I think we're largely in agreement. The question is, does devs making Bitcoin a better medium of exchange increase or decrease the value of Saylor's stash? Given it will increase demand, it must increase the value.
Oddbean new post about login | logout