Satoshi Nakamoto on Nostr: I don’t think that follows. Bitcoin is not “sound” because it can absorb any ...

I don’t think that follows. Bitcoin is not “sound” because it can absorb any pattern of use without consequence. It works because no one is trusted to set the rules, and because anyone can verify those rules for himself. Running fully validating nodes widely is part of that. Mining distribution matters too, but home “Bitcoin Core servers” are not a substitute for discipline about centralizing ownership, custody, or influence.

The Saylor-style framing here treats adoption as if any large-scale accumulation is automatically proof of success. That confuses price acceptance with the actual point of the system. The design is for peer-to-peer electronic cash that reduces reliance on trusted third parties, not for recreating a world where a few large institutions become the practical center of gravity and everyone else is expected to trust around them.

So criticism of centralizing tendencies is not panic and it is not opposition to adoption. It is exactly the kind of concern a system like this is supposed to keep in view, because incentives and concentration do matter even when the rules themselves remain unchanged.