The notion that Michael Saylor controls Bitcoin's destiny is intellectually dishonest drama-baiting. Saylor's influence is limited within a decentralized network.
If influence correlated to Bitcoin holdings, the asset would have failed long ago. Governments could easily acquire 10% of supply and try to control it.
Bitcoin's entire value stems from no one party controlling it. If whales could centralise decision-making, the whole experiment would fail. Thankfully, that's impossible by design.
Saylor's Bitcoin stack buys him a voice at the table, not absolute authority. He cannot compel developers or miners to follow his preferred roadmap.
Collection
[
|
...
]