Regarding your overall post.. Wow.. lots of good points..  I doubt that any of us can keep up with so many things, and so surely sometimes there can be value in threads like this one, in which we are able to see some information that might be out there and attempt to explore it more thoroughly when we see that there has been work in that direction, yet at the same time, we might not have known where to start or even how the questions might be framed... .. So your post seems to frame the issues in an understandable way... even though there are still some folks who are not going to really understand the importance of such information.. and these things take a while to get into the consciousness of normie peeps in the population.


I am a little bit surprised that you did not put governments into your above list.  Don't get me wrong, I am not anti-government because sometimes governments do have reasons to get involved in compiling information generally and sometimes they also have legitimate reasons to get into specifics and including some personal information matters, and sometimes their getting involved in compiling, composing and even snooping on citizens does have some legitimate public interest purposes.. but at the same time, we have seen that some of the governmental departments have become abusive with their access to some of the various kinds of private information.. and for sure, these are ever evolving lines in terms of how the internet contributes to a lot of free flow of information and disinformation too.. but then sometimes governments are not even always playing fairly with their attempts to engage in oversight or maybe even refrain from employing their own disinformation tactics..

and since we may well have realized that bitcoin is the money of the internet, bitcoin has provided with quite a few ways that monetary value can be literally attached to the transmission of information, so a whole new layer of complexity comes into play in regards to what lines might be being crossed if governments are prying into financial information that they might not have previously had access and for sure we cannot be presuming that they have any kind of inherent right to see the information and we cannot even presume that some of the legal precedent is correct in terms of some areas that they have historically had access or have not have had access. it remains quite murky, currently contentious in some circles and ongoingly with aspects of explosive potentialities.

There are a lot of us who recognize that in several ways bitcoin has been engaging in various kinds of implementation aspirations and even practices to attempt to mimics aspects of physical cash transactions and some of the privacy that can be present through physical cash transactions.. but of course, the transmissibility of bitcoin causes it to raise some potentially legitimate public interest concerns for whether the same levels of privacy might still be permissible within an instrument (such as bitcoin) in which it is so easy to transmit to anywhere in the world and to anyone without preemptively stopping it... but perhaps post hoc being able to look at it in the event that there might be some ways in which some of that remains traceable.. which quite a bit still is open in bitcoin but there have always been ways to make various aspects of transactions private, while even very sophisticated persons will still sometimes fuck up and cause leaks in their transactions, which surely remains in the public interest if crimes might have been committed.


Actually, that might be another good point that you are making D_W, and I would not characterize it as "sad" but instead a demonstration that there are a lot of folks who have hardly any clue and it is not necessarily a bad thing that they are engaged in some blissful renditions to describe what they believe is going on, and the same is true that sometimes we wished that the lawmakers were to know what they are talking about a wee bit MOAR better, and when they come out with such outrageously dumb talking points that conclude the opposite of the truth, such as proclaiming that bitcoin is not ESG-friendly, then sometimes we might want to breath some sighs of relief that anything that any of those kinds of lawmakers attempt to implement is going to cause them to get reckt in one way or another, even if it is just the downfall of their reputation showing that they don't know shit. .and they might even get memified into considerable public ridicule for how dumb they are...   

Quite a bit of the ESG and green movement discussions seem to be going down that path... not that they might not have some short-term traction in some jurisdictions and cause miner migration to more friendly jurisdictions and in the meantime, tick tock next block whether bitcoin has 1m miners or 10k miners, the difficulty is going to adjust . and yes there may well be some attempts to attack, but the attacker is going to have to build the fuck out of their mining fleet in order to engage in such mining attacks, and sure some of us (even yours truly) considered the possibility that the 2021 China miner drama could have some possibilities for government level attacks on bitcoin and its mining, and even if there might have been some preparations in that direction to make such an attack, it seems that bitcoin (and miners) learned from that, which seems to have made bitcoin stronger. and sure, never say never about various attacks that could be made or that are in the works of being set up, but bitcoin remains a pretty decent formidable and moving target that is not 100% invulnerable, but still I continue to believe that anyone who is a no coiner or a low coiner better get the fuck off of zero, and now is just as good as any other time, if not even better than it was 8 months ago.