Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has lashed out on Michael Saylor’s comments about Bitcoin. Saylor’s cryptocurrency commentary about Bitcoin self-custody has been criticized by Vitalik Buterin, who warns against regulatory capture and states that “it’s not what cryptocurrency is about.”
In response to Saylor’s remarks, Vitalik Buterin acknowledged his own involvement in advancing particular Bitcoin storylines in the past.
“I probably did more than most to spread the’mountain man’ trope,” Buterin said. But he believes those statements are out of date because the “tradeoff space completely” has changed as a result of technical advancements like snarks and AA.
Michael Saylor Faces Backlash For Comments On Bitcoin
MicroStrategy executive chairman and well-known Bitcoin supporter Michael Saylor has come under fire for his recent remarks suggesting that Bitcoin should be held in the custody of big financial institutions, which contradicts his earlier support for self-custody.
Saylor made the case in an interview with Madison Reidy on October 21 that Bitcoin owners have nothing to lose by putting their cryptocurrency in the hands of “too big to fail” banks as opposed to using hardware wallets for self-custody.
The Bitcoin community has widely criticized Saylor’s comments, especially as he has long defended self-custody and even referred to it as necessary to stop influential custodians from tainting the Bitcoin network.
Reactions were swift, with many Bitcoin supporters accusing Saylor of compromising the core principle of financial sovereignty. According to Sina, the founder of 21st Capital, a Bitcoin custody company, Saylor’s recent statements suggest he is trying to turn Bitcoin into a “investment petrock,” rather than advocating for its use as a decentralized currency.
Why Is the Bitcoin Community Enraged?
Saylor’s dismissal of worries about state-sanctioned Bitcoin confiscation was a significant shift from his previous opinions, as he called those who harbor such fears “paranoid crypto-anarchists.”
He called the notion of governments seizing Bitcoin a “myth,” asserting that it was preferable to depend on financial organizations designed to act as guardians of financial assets.
Buterin in his rearks also added that he thinks Saylor’s remarks are crazy. Buterin specifically attacked Saylor’s regulatory capture strategy, citing his remarks regarding regulated firms like Fidelity and BlackRock retaining assets to win over lawmakers.
The idea of institutions holding one’s Bitcoin is drastically dangerous. Examples include deprioritizing permissionless scaling in favor of trusted third-party IOUs, strengthening ossification arguments due to institutions’ disinterest in advanced cryptographic features, centralizing coins, increasing systemic risk of loss and seizure, and disenfranchising Bitcoin holders from governance activities like running nodes or trading forks.