Specifically, Terrett claimed that Hinman met with ConsenSys officials.
So what? Was that supposed to prove he believes ETH is a security or that he planned to make it a security? Wow. XD
These founders, especially Vitalik Buterin, have made statements that others interpret as troublesome.
Such as?
On the other hand, Bitcoin remains censorship-resistant.
No, it’s not. It’s a PoW chain, after all.
Specifically, it has resisted many calls in the past to alter its code.
That’s not what censorship-resistant means at all.
It also does not have a person equivalent to Buterin.
Completely irrelevant to censorship-resistance as well. For censorship-resistant proponents, understanding what it means could be considered some standard expectation. Well, nope, it doesn’t seem so. XD
In fact, those who may have fit the bill are now in Bitcoin Cash (Roger Ver) and Bitcoin SV (Craig Wright).
And they have very elegantly proven BTC policies can be changed through their forks. The fact BTC devs refuse to do so isn’t a security measure in any way: it’s just a choice, not an impossibility.
