What do you think?
It's starting to become clear to me that Satoshi Nakamoto= white hats who created Bitcoin to alter satanic cult's plan to create CBDC and to send mockery to the fiat monetary system.
Satoshi holds 1,100,000 BTC. Trump said gov't will use bitcoin as asset backing for currency.
What if, we already have 1,100,000 Bitcoin? Remember, there only 21,000,000 BTC. That is a massive holding. White hats already have it?
Fun to think about. Thoughts?
These conspiracies exist for a reason, because stupid people tries to make conclusions without knowing the full picture.
Take encryption for example, some of the best algorithms are created by the NSA. But the specifications are open, the code is open source, and it's mathematically proven by multiple independent third parties that there is no back doors or other fuckery, you can verify this yourself too with basic math and programming skills.
So what's the deal you might ask? Why are they giving us access to good encryption. The answer is simple, because if CIA was the only ones using say AES-256 encryption everyone would see those packages and instantly know that it's CIA traffic, when everyone uses is you can't tell the difference between a CIA agent and the average Joe.
Same exact thing with the TOR network. If only CIA was using it every webmaster would know that TOR = CIA agent. Now anyone can use TOR and you have no idea who's behind the proxy IP, could be a CIA agent or more likely an average Joe. Benefits overrides the negatives.
Same thnig with crypto, open source and mathematically verifiable. It doesn't matter who created it and why as anyone with basic math and programming skills can verify that there's nothing shady going on within the network itself. There's of course shady exchanges and plenty of scammers trying to steal your coins which is why proper knowledge is important.
You're right on that some people come to erroneous conclusions because they are missing key details, I see this all the time with friends and family who reject Q or never heard of it and Devolution.
However I still pay some attention to it 1) to avoid falling into an echo chamber and 2) if someone outside is coming to similar conclusions (like how Devolution Theory already lined up heavily with Q before the author had even read Q drops) it provides some extra evidence that we're on the correct path.
Yes, too many people misunderstand "security through obscurity" and think it only applies to trying to hide your insecure server from bad guys and hope they never stumble upon it. It can also refer to hiding something in plain sight that is also secured but because it's not obvious it's less likely to be directly attacked to begin with and if it is attacked it tries to repel it without being too obvious.