Craig Wright, the Australian computer scientist who has long claimed to be Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, has renewed his criticism of Bitcoin’s governance model.
He has argued that the network’s protocol should remain permanently fixed rather than being modified through developer-led upgrades.
Fixed rules, not developer control
According to Wright, Bitcoin’s protocol should not be controlled by developers, miners, exchanges, corporations or foundations. Instead, he argued that innovation should occur at the application layer while the base protocol remains unchanged.
card
“The protocol should be fixed so that no developer, miner, exchange, foundation or corporation can rewrite the rules for its own benefit,” Wright wrote.
He argued that stable protocol rules create a level playing field, enabling businesses to compete without worrying that future software upgrades could undermine their investments or alter the network’s fundamental operation.
Criticism of Bitcoin governance
Wright also accused Bitcoin supporters of embracing what he described as governance by a small group of developers while simultaneously claiming the network is decentralized.
He argued that limiting transaction capacity, changing consensus rules and excluding dissenting voices contradict Bitcoin’s original design. He says that BTC was intended to eliminate the need to trust any individual or committee.
According to Wright, decentralization comes from preventing anyone from changing the protocol rather than allowing stakeholders to collectively determine its future direction.
Rejecting ‘generational wealth’ narrative
Wright also took aim at Bitcoin’s current investment narrative, arguing that the asset’s marketing has shifted from “electronic cash” to “digital gold,” then to a “store of value,” and more recently to promises of “generational wealth.”
He argued that such claims ignore basic economic realities: a trillion-dollar asset cannot realistically deliver the exponential returns seen during Bitcoin’s early years.
Wright further asserted that market capitalization does not represent realizable wealth because large-scale selling would significantly depress prices. This makes it impossible for all holders to cash out at quoted valuations.
