Lawrence Damilola
Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, has strongly criticized MicroStrategy’s Michael Saylor for suggesting that Bitcoin users should rely on large financial institutions to hold their cryptocurrency.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter) yesterday, Buterin described Saylor’s suggestion as “batshit insane,” referring to a growing debate in the crypto community over Bitcoin custodianship.
Buterin’s comments came in response to Saylor’s recent statement advocating that Bitcoin holders trust “too big to fail” banks like BlackRock and Fidelity to safeguard their assets. Saylor, in an interview on Monday, argued that these institutions, with government and regulatory backing, are better suited to serve as custodians of Bitcoin.
Saylor asserted that Bitcoin holders stand to gain everything by transferring their Bitcoin to institutions, arguing that fears regarding the U.S. government interfering with their self-custody rights are unfounded. He said these are just the thoughts of “paranoid crypto-anarchists.”
According to Saylor, large financial entities are “engineered” to handle assets safely, which could offer additional protection to Bitcoin holders.
The suggestion marks a shift from Saylor’s previous support for Bitcoin self-custody, a practice widely promoted to reduce reliance on intermediaries and protect users from potential risks tied to centralized control. Saylor’s latest comments have sparked backlash from prominent figures in the crypto space, including Buterin.
Criticism from the Crypto Community
Jameson Lopp, chief security officer of Bitcoin custody firm Casa, also criticized Saylor’s proposal. Lopp emphasized the importance of self-custody, arguing that it strengthens the Bitcoin network. According to Lopp, placing Bitcoin into the hands of large financial institutions could increase systemic risks, such as asset seizure and loss, and stifle innovation. He pointed out that relying on such institutions could limit participation in Bitcoin’s governance.
ShapeShift founder Erik Voorhees added his voice to the criticism. Voorhees stated that the ability to withdraw Bitcoin into self-custody is essential to preventing centralization and the corruption that can arise from it. He further remarked that Saylor’s casual dismissal of this fundamental concept deserved the backlash he was receiving from the crypto community.
Saylor’s remarks were part of a broader discussion about the future of Bitcoin custody. They came just weeks after the collapse of the crypto exchange FTX, where users lost access to their Bitcoin. Saylor’s comments have continued to draw criticism as the debate over Bitcoin’s custodianship deepens.
Read More
- Michael Saylor Faces Backlash Over Bitcoin Custody Comments
- Ethereum’s Future: How Vitalik Buterin Plans to Transform Staking and Decentralization
- Can Meme Coins Save the World? Vitalik Buterin Thinks So
Lawrence does not hold any crypto asset. This article is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. The Shib Magazine and The Shib Daily are the official media and publications of the Shiba Inu cryptocurrency project. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial adviser before making any investment decisions.
