It was stated by Galaxy’s head of research, Alex Thorn, that a recent poll with twenty-five institutional Bitcoin investors is consistent with intelligence that has been gathered by him over the last few months.
It is apparent that the majority of institutional Bitcoin investors are unaware of or remain unconcerned by the Bitcoin Core versus Knots controversy that has persisted for the past few months, as indicated by Galaxy Digital’s head of research, Alex Thorn.
The controversy revolves around arguments about what Bitcoin is intended to be utilized for and whether non-financial operations ought to be omitted, and it has been triggered by the recent Bitcoin Core v30 update, which is alleged by some to open the “floodgate” to spam.
It was asserted by advocates of Knots nodes that this type of “spam” ought to be eliminated, as a path could be created for malicious individuals to embed illegal and immoral content into the blockchain.
However, it is believed by Bitcoin Core that any limitations could potentially fragment the network, cause perplexity for users, and be inconsistent with one of the technology’s key tenets.
Most People Neither Know Nor Care
In an X post on Monday, it was declared by Thorn that he reached the conclusion after conducting a survey with twenty-five institutional Bitcoin investors Galaxy is affiliated with, and it was ascertained that $46% were uninformed of the controversy, while $36% were ambiguous or lacked concern.
Of the remaining eighteen percent, a preference was signaled for Bitcoin Core’s argument by all those who responded.
“Real capital, bona fide financers, service providers, and even government officials are convinced there is no issue whatsoever or are uninformed that a debate even exists; at best, it is regarded as a hypothetical problem, and their proposed solution accomplishes nothing to solve the (fabricated) problem that is asserted to be real,” was declared by Thorn.
“Even if it is adopted all their legal theories are mumbo jumbo and the fears about them are ones that everyone got comfortable with years ago during early debates over the legality of permissionless decentralized systems.”
Bitcoin Poll Was Limited in Size but Still Representative, Thorn Says
The poll comprised only twenty-five institutional Bitcoin investors, so when the soundness of the poll’s sample size was challenged by a user, Thorn replied that it was a “fair question,” but the user was assured that his poll aligned with observations that had been made by him.
“Their identities will not be disclosed by me, but I will say yes, and the results from that poll correspond precisely with my discussions with other major holders, investors, leaders at miners and service providers, and government officials over the last several months,” was stated by him.
Thorn further elaborated that while miners were not surveyed by him, he is intimately acquainted with the majority of the major ones, and it is evident that neither attention is being paid nor tracking is being undertaken by anyone.
Three Possible Outcomes Ahead
Last month, a Bitcoin improvement proposal for a soft fork instigated indignation on X over a section that was construed to threaten legal ramifications for individuals who decline the fork.
However, it is assumed by Thorn that the argument will culminate in one of three ways, one of which could inflict severe detriment upon Bitcoin uptake.
The first way, as articulated by Thorn, is characterized by “no one maintaining interest, and their diminishment into obscurity.”
“The second most likely result is that the problem they are apprehensive of is initiated into existence by alienating everyone from Bitcoin, and still their separate chain concepts meet with failure.”
“A third and exceedingly distant likelihood is that their proposed changes become adopted… but even in that unlikely scenario, their solutions fall short. And because their solutions fall short and they will have scared the world into fearing permissionless systems, Bitcoin adoption will be irreparably harmed.”
