~snip~
OK, so the Giga-Chads have already opened a debate about the issue.
There's also another shower thought that I brought up before. What if the banksters and institutions like BlackRock hold more than 50% of the Bitcoin in circulation, and increasing. Could be say that Bitcoin as a currency has failed?
OK, so the Giga-Chads have already opened a debate about the issue.
There's also another shower thought that I brought up before. What if the banksters and institutions like BlackRock hold more than 50% of the Bitcoin in circulation, and increasing. Could be say that Bitcoin as a currency has failed?
Bitcoin will always remain available to ordinary people even in the event that someone owns 50% or more coins, and that means that the idea on which Satoshi designed the whole thing will still exist. As for the question of whether Bitcoin has failed as a currency, it's highly debatable, but I believe we can agree that most people don't perceive it that way.
It remains to be seen what effects the possible spot BTC ETF will produce (short-term or long-term), but I personally hope that there will always be a certain percentage of people who will follow Satoshi's vision and will not deviate from the basic ideas - which means that Bitcoin will always represent what it represents today.
But how high is the threshold before it truly becomes concerning? More than 80%? 90%? Bitcoin is a limited resource and there's twelve out of twenty of the biggest investment banks and asset managers in the world that wants to gain custody of Bitcoin in some form.
Altogether they control TRILLIONS of wealth.
It's probably why Bitcoin developer Peter Todd has currently been saying that he's open to the idea of an inflationary cryptocurrency.