I will check that out. The one problem is that regardless of who controls BTC, the crypto genie is out of the bottle, people will want to obtain it, or other cryptos, to protect the value of their money while the paper fiat steadily collapses. Even if it's a con, because its control is centralized, the shining value of the coin will draw people in like barracudas. It's like Sun's chain. He centralized the thing, everyone knows it, but the fact remains that it somehow retains value. The big question we might need to ask is how realistic is indefinite decentralization when we know it's the nature of power to ebb, flow, and often accumulate into the hands of the few. I get the idea of protecting the ideal, but what if the ideal is unrealistic? What if it's like wanting to end war, fantastic in theory, but likely not gonna happen? Do we resign ourselves to the nature of reality, or do we continue to try and make the impossible happen? What sort of damage do you see them doing with the Dev team you mentioned? If they do anything to shake faith in the BTC, won't it simply lead to more splits and an eventual loss of faith in the coin? Even if they do have some control, isn't it better to be on a deflationary model instead of a hyperinflationary one? Isn't a deflationary model kind of like an undo fix to deal with hyperinflation?