CakeDeFi’s CEO, Julian Hosp, recently shared his thoughts on Twitter regarding the true motivations of some Bitcoin supporters. According to Hosp, while many claims to champion Bitcoin’s mission of decentralization and financial freedom, their actions suggest a greater concern for personal financial gain. This observation raises important questions about the true values and priorities of those who claim to support the cryptocurrency movement.
Hosp was observed addressing ScopeLift’s CEO, Ben DiFrancesco’s response to MicroStrategy’s declaration of possessing 1 out of every 150 Bitcoin that will ever exist. DiFrancesco downplayed MicroStrategy’s announcement by stating, “Honestly, one of the least optimistic things about Bitcoin I’ve heard lately. I have no clue why anyone who supports Bitcoin would applaud this.”
DeFrancesco’s statement ignited a lively Twitter debate on the fundamental principles of Bitcoin. Numerous Bitcoin aficionados and Twitter users chimed in, with Hosp being one of them. In his response, Hosp maintained a professional tone.
“Because deep inside, Bitcoiners don’t care about the mission, they just care about ‘price go up’ like everyone else.”
Furthermore, the individual asserts that those who possess Bitcoin utilize a disingenuous pretext by labeling all other digital currencies as “shitcoin.” This insinuates that proponents of Bitcoin disregard alternative cryptocurrencies as subpar due to their lack of comparable profit potential.
Furthermore, Hosp reinforces this assertion by presenting a straightforward hypothetical scenario. He asks, “Would you be amenable to Bitcoin serving as the universal world reserve currency, even if neither you nor anyone within your circle retained their Bitcoin holdings, resulting in your purchasing power remaining unchanged?”
Hosp said most Bitcoin holders would need help finding the proposed outcome satisfactory. Their response is, “No, that would be unjust. I have held onto my Bitcoin for an extended period.” Hosp argues that this highlights the primary motivation of Bitcoin holders, which is not the success of Bitcoin’s mission, but rather their financial gain. He acknowledges that this is acceptable but encourages individuals to be transparent about their intentions instead of masking them behind a facade of supporting a particular mission or ideology.
