Angehefteter Tweet

Think about this for a second 👇
Most people say they care about:
• Fair launch
• Decentralization
• Security
• No insider advantage
But then…
They choose Bitcoin, a network where:
Satoshi mined ~1M BTC in the early days
Mining is dominated by massive industrial facilities
Hashpower continues consolidating
Whales can move markets with a single transaction
And they pass on Kaspa, which:
Was cryptographically proven to be fairly launched
Had no premine, no VC allocation
Uses rapid block times to improve decentralization
Aims for Bitcoin-level security with far more scalability
Avoids long confirmation bottlenecks
So help me understand this logically:
If the values are fairness, decentralization, and sound tech…
Why default to legacy reputation over evolving architecture?
Why defend “first” over “better”?
Is it:
• Network effect?
• Brand power?
• Liquidity depth?
• Lindy effect?
• Institutional trust?
• Or just comfort with the familiar?
I’m not attacking. I’m genuinely asking.
Because if we’re honest, most people don’t actually buy the “best tech.”
They buy:
What’s safest socially
What’s most liquid
What institutions bless
What feels untouchable
So the real question becomes:
Are we optimizing for ideology…
Or for upside + safety?
Convince me.
Why $BTC, not $KAS?
English

















