Haseeb

Yeah, so I completely agree with you.

I very much think that they are in pole position to be that economic advocate for ETH, the asset.

That said, it does put them in this kind of uncomfortable governance position where now they have disproportionate power over the network.

A lot of Ethereum story is that it's credibly neutral, is that it's, you know, whatever, World War III resistant, blah, blah, blah.

If you have one public company

that is the major, like the largest steward of Ethereum and has the ability to kind of stop the show if they want to.

They say, hey, you know, Ethereum is, you know, not enforcing OFAC compliance.

Well, that's not good for us because we're a public company and we're getting subpoenas.

So, you know, like there's in principle, I mean, again, I'm kind of scaremongering a little bit.

I don't think this is likely.

And I think it's also possible that Bitmine, if they get into that position, let's say that they start to own a third of the overall stage supply of ETH, right?

One can imagine that maybe, okay, we're going to move some of that ETH into DeFi to get yield instead of putting it into staking.

Maybe instead we're also going to move it into other stakers instead of the staker that we own.

We're going to move some of it into Lido and whatever so that we're not actually directly in control.

And maybe even we put it into blind trusts

And those trusts are responsible for staking.

And the governance over those are done by third parties or somebody else entirely that has some kind of nonprofit type structure around it.

And we pledge our ETH there, and we don't have corporate governance control over it.

Therefore, we are not in control of ETH.

I think this is a problem that if they get to strategy levels of success...