Meet the new Bitkey.
No seed phrase.
Multisig by default.
Built-in inheritance.
And now, with 100% more screen.
See what's new: https://t.co/wsBnYHYu73
If you call anything with yield dependent on market demand a Ponzi, then you’re also calling gold-linked notes from Goldman Sachs or JPMorgan Chase Ponzi schemes - which is obviously absurd. The difference is simple: Ponzi = deception and no underlying exposure, structured yield products = transparent risk premia priced off real markets.
Nobody calls gold a Ponzi scheme.
Nobody calls real estate a Ponzi scheme.
Both require new buyers to maintain value.
Yet, some say bitcoin is a Ponzi.
Why?
For 5000 years, people have agreed:
3000 BC: Money should be scarce.
2000 BC: Money should be scarce.
1000 BC: Money should be scarce.
0: Money should be scarce.
1000: Money should be scarce.
1500: Money should be scarce.
1900: Money should be scarce.
1914-1970: Ok but what if it’s not.
1971: Money is what the gov says it is.
1990: Financialize all the things.
2008: Oops maybe not.
2009: Money should be scarce -> Bitcoin.
2010-2019: Bitcoin makes no sense.
2020: Money printer go brrrr.
2021: Wait maybe bitcoin makes sense.
2025: Money should be scarce.
A currency that can be infinitely printed by a government is an anomaly.
You don’t have to accept it, opt out with bitcoin.
@saylor Bitcoin is converging toward a stable equilibrium where global capital coordination reinforces its role as digital capital, and as long as its rules remain credible and resistant to misguided changes, its growth trajectory becomes increasingly robust.
Bitcoin has won. Global consensus is that $BTC is digital capital. The four-year cycle is dead. Price is now driven by capital flows. Bank and digital credit will determine Bitcoin’s growth trajectory. The biggest risk is bad ideas driving iatrogenic protocol changes.