I really don't care what Roger Ver does because I view all digital shitcoins as Keynesian scams based on artificial scarcity compared to real money (physical metals), but there's a CLEAR logic problem to all of Lauda's thinking, probably due to having the disability known as female brain.  Her stance seems to revolve around the idea that everyone on the planet should be forced to use some imaginary widget named Bitcoin as money, and even though Bitcoin is a completely imaginary, nebulous thing, Bitcoin is of course her authoritarian view of whatever she claims it is.

Some people claim Bitcoin is determined by the longest chain rule, but longest chain does absolutely nothing to resolve rough consensus attacks, and Bitcoin core - the people who claim to BE Bitcoin - already made the ridiculous claim that miners don't matter and only users and nodes matter.  

What REALLY happened is, the first day ASICs were created there was no longer any reason whatsoever for Bitcoin to exist because people are supposed to mine their own coins instead of being forced to buy them from a third party, and this is where decentralization is supposed to originate from.  Rather than all these people admitting Bitcoin is a failed experiment that's designed to centralize, they started piling on lie after lie and attempting to obfuscate and change what the rules of the game are on the fly to try and hide the fact that because transaction validators are designed to centralize, it has zero fundamentals, is a permissioned ledger in practice, and has no reason to exist.