A question on The assumption of Coinbases altruism.

Sorry for the annoyance, I’m just trying to learn and understand Eths thinking. About Coinbase being altruistic.

You are assuming if the government declares security and goes after staking between merge and unlock:

That Coinbase has no plan, no Allies, and no argument to get users and Eth holders on their side (like NGU if Eth becomes cbdc infrastructure). You should review the New York Agreement. Coinbase has already worked with Allies against a main chain to attack censorship resistance against the wishes of devs for profit.

And now we are talking about an opportunity to permanently rent seek on the entire future regulated financial CBDC infrastructure. That’s a holy grail man. Coinbases shareholders would not be upset. Even if they lost it’s still probably worth the shot for shareholders, especially since they likely can’t be successfully sued by customers who get slashed for obeying OFAC.

Again, CB has already pissed off their customers to attack censorship resistance for profit. This is history not wild speculation.

For allies, I imagine It’d be easy, or at least plausible to get USDC/Circle(for sure, who basically chooses the fork, and the other self destructs) Lido, Infura, Consynsus, binance, jpmorgan, many investors, and all of the VCs and their front ends on side to rent seek the entire future regulated financial system forever. Just off the top of my head.

Let me have it. What am I missing?