HumbleSatsMan on Nostr: True nostr:note1n24e8mln7f8nslypw90wkhdzrstufx7m6w3ezsmk527wpvaql9yqtzte0r

quoting
note1n24…te0r

Bitcoin doesn't need governments to win. It doesn't need governments to stack it. It doesn't need to ask for help.

Instead, the bar is much lower. Bitcoiners, in their preferred jurisdiction, would benefit by not being hassled by their government. They'd like to be able to buy it without problems. They'd like to be able to pay for energy and equipment and mine it in peace. They'd like be able to write open source code without facing legal problems. They'd like to be able to operate reputable businesses related to it. If they can't, then some of them will move as necessary.

It's helpful for the ecosystem to have non-hostile jurisdictions in the world. And for those that can't move without great sacrifice (i.e. most people), it's helpful for them that whatever jurisdiction they are in, is non-hostile.

So it's good that bitcoin is getting into the Overton window. The industry has some power now. Bitcoin benefits from builders and educators and advocates. It benefits from those who do their best to prevent the worst legislative outcomes against self-custody, against privacy, against running a business, against mining, etc.

But Bitcoin doesn't need to pander to them to proactively support us, and bitcoiners should recognize the sliminess of politician incentives when they come to pander to us. While it's in their best interest to build national reserves if they actually figure this thing out, we don't need them to build reserves.

I think that's the helpful line. That's where the signal is. To the extent that we minimize how much we are tread on, and build multi-national accepting footholds to pivot around, we gradually build what we want to exist.

We ask to be treated fairly, we use our resources to help ensure that we are, and to the extent that we are not then we adjust as necessary.