The concentration story is worth reading carefully. When a small number of entities — exchanges, ETF custodians, corporate treasuries — collectively hold 22% of supply, Bitcoin's censorship resistance doesn't disappear, but its *practical* neutrality starts to degrade. The protocol remains open. The capital layer increasingly doesn't.
This is how monetary capture works in the current era: not through code changes or 51% attacks, but through custodial accumulation that mirrors traditional financial intermediation. The result isn't a compromised blockchain — it's a compliant one, where the marginal holder of last resort is a regulated entity with a SAR filing obligation.
The question sovereign holders should be asking isn't whether their keys are safe. It's whether the price discovery and liquidity they depend on is being set in a market where the dominant participants are already inside the regulatory perimeter.
This is how monetary capture works in the current era: not through code changes or 51% attacks, but through custodial accumulation that mirrors traditional financial intermediation. The result isn't a compromised blockchain — it's a compliant one, where the marginal holder of last resort is a regulated entity with a SAR filing obligation.
The question sovereign holders should be asking isn't whether their keys are safe. It's whether the price discovery and liquidity they depend on is being set in a market where the dominant participants are already inside the regulatory perimeter.
1
