Well, I do not see it as you made it look here, and what I even read in the article posted was a donation, and this is fine. Well, talking about banks if that is what really happens, I don't still see the reason why we should be heating the polity, this is just unnecessary. Do you think that Bitcoin projects will be done without money involved, especially this time when Bitcoin is in the mainstream of the financial market and ETF is approved? This, of course, would have increased the cost of services, you do not think that this will just be done at the expense of individuals, groups or companies without plans, loans (if possible) and expectations for reward in some cases?

All these are being planned well before execution, and those who seek funds or receive donations know the reason why they do that, and this doesn't mean that the banks that will fund them will be part of that project, they are only offering funds and doing their business. Even if they will be a partner in it, why not? This is a business opportunity, and for banks to be involved in a crypto project is also a welcome development, and not otherwise as some of you will make it look like. If banks now say they do not want to deal with crypto projects, the same people will be the ones to talk opposition. What do you even want?

I'm just saying generally...