PANews reported on October 23 that according to The Block, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin recently criticized the views of MicroStrategy founder Michael Saylor. In a recent interview with the New Zealand Herald, Saylor said that concerns about using regulated entities to custody Bitcoin mainly come from "paranoid cryptocurrency anarchists." He elaborated on the case for Bitcoin as a better digital asset and a means of storing value, and advocated that it should be regarded as "a digital currency that is essential to human progress." However, his views on regulated custody have caused a strong reaction within the Bitcoin community, especially from advocates of self-custody, who have harshly criticized it, and some even questioned whether Saylor really understands the essence of Bitcoin.
In response to this controversy, Vitalik expressed his views on the X platform. He bluntly stated: "I am happy to say that I think Michael Saylor's comments are simply ridiculous. He seems to explicitly support the approach of protecting cryptocurrencies through regulatory capture, but there are many precedents for the failure of this approach. I think this is completely contrary to the core principles of cryptocurrency." Vitalik's remarks were in response to Jameson Lopp, co-founder and chief technology officer of Casa. Lopp previously warned: "Bitcoin self-custody is not an exclusive option for paranoid people. Convincing people to trust third-party custodians actually brings many long-term negative effects." He emphasized that self-custody is not only crucial for individual Bitcoin holders, but also the key to maintaining decentralization, enhancing network security, maintaining governance participation, and promoting continuous innovation and expansion without relying on third parties.
Unlike Lopp, Saylor advocates holding Bitcoin through regulated entities such as BlackRock, Fidelity, JPMorgan Chase and State Street. He believes that doing so is not only safer, but also reduces volatility and reduces the risk of loss. Because the government and lawmakers have investments in these institutions, these institutions are less likely to be targeted by the government than unregulated private entities.
