Governments And Large Institutions Can Buy All The Bitcoin They Want (Except Yours)
Follow Aaron on Nostr or X. An X post by Anita Posch warning about the risks of governments and institutions buying up large amounts of bitcoin went viral this week— even if just because of the trollish community note th...
Archive context
Older archive item. Useful for background and entity history, but not a fresh market-moving signal.
An X post by Anita Posch warning about the risks of governments and institutions buying up large amounts of bitcoin went viral this week— even if just because of the trollish community note that appeared underneath it. I think the main concern here is that these big holders could influence the Bitcoin consensus rules to impose censorship.
When it comes to censorship specifically, mining centralization is actually a more direct threat. But if it’s just miners censoring, it would only last for as long as a majority of miners is willing to keep doing it— at the expense of forfeiting transaction fees. If and when the censorship stops, transactions would start confirming again as if nothing happened.
If economic nodes were to enforce censorship as new protocol rules as well, however, it can indeed be considered a soft fork. In this scenario, miners can’t revert from the censorship without splitting the blockchain between “upgraded” (censoring) and non-upgraded nodes; that would constitute a hard fork. Buyers and sellers of the two versions of bitcoin would then determine which blockchain is more valuable; this is why some bitcoiners are concerned about governments and other large institutions accumulating a significant share of the bitcoin supply.
It’s a reasonable concern, and something to be aware of. At the same time (and similar to my argument in this Take), it’s not obvious to me that governments or large institutions would be willing to risk it all by betting on a censorship fork of Bitcoin. But even more importantly, there isn’t much we can do to stop governments or other institutions from buying bitcoin anyways— nor should there be, as that would (ironically) itself represent a form of censorship.
The best countermeasure, in this regard, was actually already proposed by Nikolaus: Don’t sell MicroStrategy your bitcoin.
This article is a Take. Opinions expressed are entirely the author's and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
Why this matters
This bitcoin story adds another data point to the current market tape and is useful when read alongside nearby source coverage.
Original source
Read on Bitcoin MagazineRelated market context
Bitcoin’s BIP-110 fork is back, but its backers want to replace the miners and change PoW
Bitcoin’s BIP-110 push failed to gain meaningful mining support over the weekend, leaving the proposal stranded on a minority chai...
BIP-110 Fork Stalls at Two Blocks as Bitcoin Miners Refuse to Follow
Bitcoin Magazine BIP-110 Fork Stalls at Two Blocks as Bitcoin Miners Refuse to Follow The Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP)-110 a...
TaoWeave promised to hoard TAO forever, but paying the bills just forced another crypto treasury sell-off of 3,959 TAO
TaoWeave, formerly known as Oblong, says its long-term strategy is to accumulate Bittensor's TAO token. Its latest filing shows th...
Sam Altman ChatGPT AI Says XRP Real Test Is Still Ahead
The lawsuit that defined XRP for years is over, and that changes the math. ChatGPT AI predicts a run from $1.02 to $4 to $6 by the...
Strategy has $785 million left to close STRC’s final $5 gap after selling $213 million in Bitcoin
Strategy’s preferred stock STRC is steadily moving back toward its $100 target as the Bitcoin treasury company increases its purch...
A mysterious whale just funneled 6,494 BTC into Binance, triggering massive sell-off fears
Over three weeks, a Bitcoin address took in more than 6,494 BTC and moved its full confirmed balance, with nearly all of the trace...