Great question. I figured out the identity of Satoshi (it is a group). It is probably best for me to not mention who they are. My guess is that they did not plan on the ASIC boost problems that Bitman used to gain mining dominance. I also think they thought there would be great consensus and not a possible 3 versions of BTC by November. However Satoshi's groups main objective is to control (secretly in the background) the global leverage of BTC no matter how it ends up being. The secret is their 4.5% BTC holdings held secretly in a wallet that has never moved. This will provide the holder great global wealth and leverage in the future
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I can understand the greater wealth...if the price keeps going up. I also see how their position is going to be even stronger as the currency is fractured among the holders (meaning people have tenths of a coin as opposed to multiple coins because of the price). What I dont get is if they issues arent resolved, there is a chance that Bitcoin starts to dwindle. Even if they step in, could they stop a falling knife?
The scarcity gives them some protection on the store of value side of things for a while. However, as these assets become more well known, people might switch allegiances. And yes three bitcoins might be too many although BCH doesnt seem to be making major headway and still has some of the same issues as BTC.
They can stop a falling knife. If BCH gains traction they are in the same positive leverage position they have with BTC core legacy chain
Maybe I ought to look a bit closer at BCH.
My view up to this point is that LTC (or some other token) would take over the money aspect. For some reason BCH struck me as a childish spat that some took their ball to another court.
Yes I agree