pull down to refresh
He was really ahead of his time. I still fully believed in Bitcoin back in 2018. My eyes would be opened soon enough. The signs were there, but it was easy to believe Bitcoin could still adapt to the changing environment, that it was unstoppable. Meanwhile, the gains kept us happy, complacent.
Those who can work-out game theory into the future are the ones with the greatest advantage, to be able to rotate strategies ahead of the herd. Timing is unpredictable though, and when you think surely the rest of the herd will catch-up and realize whats happening, is when you find out just how much public sentiment lags, how easy is to keep people distracted, and how short peoples' memories are.
He very much was!
Back in 2018, until around the plandemic even, I too was pretty much oblivious to the fuckery that goes on around us.
Normal people are distracted by their own mundane-ness. I hate Normies so much, it is unreal.
I would like to give a shoutout to Miles for publishing the above paper by Booby.
For anyone short on time, here is an AI condensed version of the original essay:
"Bitcoin is not a genuine alternative to the traditional financial system. It is another instrument created or controlled by the same wealthy financial and intelligence interests it supposedly challenges.
The stock market provides the model. Stock prices are often detached from the underlying value of companies, and powerful investors have enough money and leverage to influence markets for their own benefit. Bitcoin operates in much the same way. Its dramatic rises and crashes are presented as the natural result of speculation, but a small group of large holders and financial institutions has enormous power over price and trading volume.
Bitcoin’s supposed anonymity is also largely an illusion. Most people buy cryptocurrency through exchanges that require identification, proof of address, tax information, and other personal details comparable to opening a bank account. Truly anonymous transactions are technically possible, but they are far more complicated, which is why most users rely on intermediaries. In practice, Bitcoin is often no more private than conventional banking.
Its claim to decentralization is equally questionable. A relatively small number of addresses control a huge share of the Bitcoin supply. That concentration gives a tiny group enormous economic influence over the market. Technical decentralization means little if ownership itself is highly centralized.
The people and institutions surrounding cryptocurrency also deserve scrutiny. Many prominent crypto investors, developers, and entrepreneurs came from major banks, wealthy families, government contractors, defense-related companies, or institutions with close ties to intelligence agencies. Figures associated with Ethereum, Ripple, EOS, venture capital, exchanges, and early Bitcoin development repeatedly overlap with the very financial and government structures cryptocurrency supposedly exists to escape.
These connections suggest that cryptocurrency is not an outsider movement at all. The rapid embrace of blockchain by major banks and investment firms makes this even clearer. Wall Street institutions have not been destroyed or displaced by cryptocurrency; they have adopted it. If the largest banks, financial firms, technology contractors, and government-linked companies are enthusiastic about blockchain, then cryptocurrency begins to look less like a revolution against the system and more like an extension of it: Wall Street 2.0.
The conventional origin story of Bitcoin is just as suspicious. Satoshi Nakamoto supposedly appeared from nowhere, created Bitcoin, and disappeared. Around that story are figures such as Dorian Nakamoto, Hal Finney, Wei Dai, and Nick Szabo, many of whom had connections to universities, technology firms, military work, or government-linked institutions. Those overlaps raise the possibility that Bitcoin emerged from a larger institutional project rather than from a lone anonymous genius.
The central deception is the idea that Bitcoin represents private, decentralized, anti-bank “sound money.” In reality, cryptocurrency concentrates wealth, relies heavily on regulated intermediaries, and has been rapidly absorbed by the same financial institutions it was supposedly designed to replace. It attracts people who distrust banks and Wall Street while ultimately keeping their money inside a financial structure dominated by concentrated wealth and institutional power."