Control-Plane Capital's avatar
Control-Plane Capital
.
npub1x9hg...6rta
Truth seeker
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
I wonder what happens if conspiracy theorists start talking about the conspiracy theory that actually matters - our One World Government and how the head of the snake/coordination hub is Switzerland. About how the US and China/Russia or more broadly the West and BRICS pretend to be in competition and meanwhile: - They are all poisoning their citizens with the same vaccines and big pharma concoctions. - Robbing their citizens with fiat fuckery, inflation and taxation. - All these countries that hate each other meet in Switzerland every month to coordinate policy. - All these countries are spraying their citizens with heavy metals from the sky. - All these countries are blasting their citizens with 5G (6G upcoming). - All these countries agreed to forbid private exploration of Antarctica during the Cold War when they allegedly hated each other. - All Central Banks coincidentally have matching liquidity cycles and coordinate to cause crises/inflation. - All rival states exhibited near-identical public-health playbooks (lockdowns, mandates, travel controls, QR systems) during Covid-1984. - All of these countries (98% of global GDP) are simultaneously developing CBDCs. - Across all these countries, investors do not directly own broker-held stocks, bank deposits, bonds in custodianship, mortgages, or lien-encumbered land; assets held via custodians/CSDs (DTCC, Euroclear, Clearstream, etc.) are legally collateralizable and sweepable in failure. The legal structure is globally synchronized (a relatively recent shift). And there are many, many more examples. When youtube starts putting banners under videos that we don't live under a One World Government and this is an archaic conspiracy theory, we'll know we're doing something right 😂 More context: View article →
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
I first heard the phrase “You can’t fix the system from within the system“ from Jeff Booth in the context of politics. Completely agree with Jeff. This is just 1 of his many great points. TL;DR You can’t fix a system from inside when its revealed preference is to protect control and stability over fairness and truth. Inside lanes are built to absorb critique, delay change, and ratchet capability. Real shifts come from changing defaults, budgets, and choke points — or from building parallel rails that make the old path economically irrational. Everything else is scripted catharsis. More context: - https://controlplanecapital.com/p/why-you-cant-fix-the-system-from
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
It's wild that you can learn more about investing from Aldous Huxley than from any of these chumps who follow Powell's every move and record 1 hour podcasts analyzing his body language. For example, this quote is great. image What Huxley is saying: - “Abnormally normal” = perfectly compliant to a sick environment. If a society’s core incentives reward obedience, consumption, and performative virtue over truth and agency, then adjustment is a pathology: you’re healthy-for-the-system, not healthy-for-yourself. - Silenced “human voice” = the self that resists harmful incentives. The child’s curiosity, refusal to lie, intolerance for double standards - trained out early via schooling, media norms, and micro-rewards/punishments until dissent feels wrong. - No symptoms = no alarms. The “neurotic” at least shows friction with false incentives; the “normal” runs without error messages. That’s efficient for rulers and lethal for authenticity. Huxley’s core insight isn’t “future dystopia”, it’s cost curves: pleasure is a cheaper control input than pain, defaults govern better than laws, and language (“safety”, “stability”, “community”) edits reality. If you track incentives, defaults, and word swaps - not ideals - you’ll predict human behavior with embarrassing accuracy.
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
Sometimes it's difficult to tell between controlled opposition, retarded opposition and controlled, retarded opposition.
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
The most alpha I've been able to add to my process has been zooming out real far and researching "conspiracy theories". I've already talked about the Public-facing Elites ( https://controlplanecapital.com/p/public-facing-elites-using-myth-making ) The public-facing Elites are the interfaces between the Controllers and the masses. They are carefully selected not because they are the deepest technical minds (those remain inside state/para-state labs and defense contractors) but because they can serve as myth-making avatars - “trustworthy human front ends” for systemic agendas. The best example is Elon Musk: - Turns state agendas into heroic challenges (”colonize Mars”, “accelerate sustainable energy”). - Makes highly complex state projects legible to the masses (rockets, EVs). - Redefines what is possible, i.e., multi-planetary destiny. I've also talked about why Public Officials are deliberately selected and made look inept. ( https://controlplanecapital.com/p/inept-public-officials-vs-genius ) A good example is Jerome Powell with is transitory inflation 😂 Making officials look inept is not a bug; it's the lubricant that shifts legitimacy from public institutions to private control substrates. You manufacture "visible incompetence" at the top of public orgs (politicians, Fed chair, Treasury secretary, spokespeople, etc) because of: 1) Plausible deniability & blame absorption. - If outcomes are unpopular, “the politicians bungled it”. Strategic continuity survives; personnel rotate. The cockpit stays untouched. 2) Consent management via despair. - Chronic bungling signals “government can’t execute” → public begs for capable private operators. That’s a soft mandate for outsourcing power to state-embedded firms. 3) Overton-window widening. - Visible ineptitude makes extraordinary measures and emergency procurement look reasonable. “We can’t wait for bureaucracy; give XYZ (pre-selected) the keys”. 4) Scapegoat economics. - Credit is privatized (heroes, “innovators”), blame is socialized (”Congress/Fed messed up”). This sustains asymmetric payoffs to chosen vendors. 5) Narrative bifurcation: bumbling State vs heroic Genius. - Positions private avatars (Musk/Altman/Karp) as only credible solvers. Funds, talent, and data flow toward them by default. 6) Obfuscation of the command layer. - Clownish spokespeople hide where decisions are really made (standards bodies, security councils, procurement compacts, platform policies). Confusion is a moat. 7) Policy ratchet lubricant. - Each “failure” justifies a new knob (ID, provenance, kill-switches, programmable money). Sunsets don’t sunset. 8) Humiliation tests. - Public tolerates obvious dysfunction → the Controllers mark how far they can push next. Demoralization lowers resistance cost. I've also written about Stanford Graduates/Dropouts ( https://controlplanecapital.com/p/investing-in-stanford-graduatesdropouts ). Perhaps the most impressive list. Here are just some examples: Elon Musk, Alex Karp, John F. Kennedy, Rishi Sunak, Sundar Pichai, Mukesh Ambani, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Herbert Hoover, Mitt Romney, Peter Thiel, Cory Booker, Jawed Karim, Aaron Swartz, Dianne Feinstein, Philippe of Belgium, Steve Ballmer, Rachel Maddow, Laurene Powell Jobs, Kevin Systrom, Phil Knight, Sam Altman, Sam Harris, Jensen Huang, Ashraf Ghani, Adam Schiff, Reed Hastings, Josh Hawley, Mike Krieger, Reid Hoffman, Ehud Barak, Morris Chang, etc. The article I have not yet written is just zooming out even more and defining all the roles in the system. E.g. Peter Thiel sits above the public-facing Elites, below the Controllers. He is an Intermediary Governor. They are not the TV-facing “geniuses” or CEOs. They are the switch-owners: people who can change parameters on infrastructure others depend on. They don’t need public charisma; they need veto rights, standard-setting power, and custody over process. What Intermediary Governors actually do - Parameterize the rules (policy knobs, standards, eligibility lists). - Sequence liquidity (who gets dollars/credit first, under what collateral). - Bless or blacklist (who’s “compliant”, “safe”, “admissible”). - Orchestrate harmonization (make the same rule appear across jurisdictions). - Allocate narrative oxygen (what gets framed as “safety”, “best practice”, “responsible”). Why Intermediary Governors matter Because defaults beat laws. A single checkbox in a standard, an app-store clause, a custody rule, or a clearing constraint moves more money/behavior than a speech. Intermediary Governors bind the cockpit (Controllers) to the machine without showing up in headlines. Some of the other roles are: 1) Legibility Architects - Purpose: Make people, assets, and flows machine-readable so they can be governed. 2) Consent Sculptors - Purpose: Keep apparent buy-in high enough that force stays cheap. 3) Shock Troopers (Crisis Accelerants) - Purpose: Use crises to push new rails while opposition is stunned. 4) Intermediary Governors (e.g. Peter Thiel) - Purpose: Enforce policy without passing laws - via chokepoints. 5) Valve Operators (Macro/Micro Fluidics) - Purpose: Modulate liquidity, credit, and attention to maintain stability and reward insiders. 6) Plausible-Deniability Brokers - Purpose: Split orders between state and private fronts; keep cockpit hidden. 7) Lightning Rods - Purpose: Absorb outrage so the architecture survives. 8) Fog Generators - Purpose: Keep opponents arguing over symbols while rails get installed. 9) Stability Farmers (Bread & Circus) - Purpose: Dampen revolt with comfort and ritual. 10) Growth Ambassadors (Legibility-Friendly Growth) - Purpose: Sponsor innovation that increases governability (not just GDP). 11) Lawfare Cartographers - Purpose: Draw the legal map so resistance is pre-criminalized. 12) Quota Distributors (Patronage) - Purpose: Buy quiet by allocating licenses, permits, grants. 13) Sacrificial Pawns - Purpose: Demonstrate “accountability” without touching the system. 14) International Sync Agents - Purpose: Keep allies’ knobs turning together so policy hits feel “inevitable”. 15) Ritual Priests (Legitimacy Caretakers) - Purpose: Maintain civic myths (elections, courts, national moments) that keep compliance cheap. The roles are many more, these are just the main ones. I am not suggesting that everyone in the system knows the bigger picture. Obviously, everything is on a need to know basis and some of this stuff is very complicated even at the surface level. Plus, one of the greatest quotes of all time: - "It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It" - Upton Sinclair
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
I posted my "What most Bitcoiners are wrong about" article in Jeff Booth's comment section yesterday and it quickly got 50 views. I paid Elon like 40 bucks for a 1 month subscription just so I can post my Bitcoin articles into the twitter void as well 😂 https://x.com/ControlPlaneCap If podcasters steal my homework and talk about these Bitcoin issues, their channels would explode (assuming they don't get nuked by the platform). Most of these issues are at the user level, meaning they are solved with education. It's sad to see Bitcoiners trying to use "intelligent leverage" (e.g. Treasury Company penny stocks, BITX, etc) without understanding what they're doing. The only intelligent leverage you can use is buy spot Bitcoin. The more spot Bitcoin the plebs own, the harder it is to suppress the price with paper Bitcoin games. This is the kind of leverage you actually want.
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
"War does not determine who is right. War only determines who is left." - Confucius
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
The Rivalry between Countries is curated; the plumbing is shared (One World Government) and this has massive investment implications. The “Rivalry” is mostly curated spectacle; plumbing is shared (money, identity, provenance, networks). States appear adversarial on the surface, but their structural incentives converge far more often than people realize. That’s why even “enemies” like the US, Russia, and China act in concert when it comes to systemic rules. 1. Monopoly on Force & Money - Every state protects force + issuance. Fiat/CBDC is the control layer, not a policy choice. 2. Stability > Rivalry. War can be theater; credit/settlement collapse ends rule. 3. Narrative Preservation - Centralized media norms, staged symbolism, curated science/tech narratives when needed. 4. Asset Legibility & Seizability - Title/custody law converges globally so collateral can be swept in crisis (read The Great Taking from David Rogers Webb). 5. Standards as Sovereignty - Identity, payments, provenance, telecom: one fabric, many flags. 6. Information Sovereignty - All blocs share the same fear: lose the infosphere → lose compliance. Outcome: convergent AI governance, moderation, provenance mandates; different logos, same knobs. How coordination happens without a “smoking gun” Standards + perimeters. - Standards (NGOs, fora, regulators) emit the same verbs: attest, revoke, trace, prove, rollback. - Perimeters (banks, clouds, app stores, ISPs, card networks) flip Acceptable Use Policies; law becomes optional. What this reveals - Rivalry is curated; plumbing is shared. When control or continuity is threatened, standards, swaps, and back-channels override ideology. - One fabric, many flags. Payments, identity, telecom, and provenance standards are global fabrics with policy dials. - Crisis = parameter update. Every shock resets the global knobs, not the fabric. Across domains — public health, identity, money, risk, energy, trade, space, sanctions, and information control — formal rivals repeatedly synchronize standards, infrastructure, and legal frameworks. The pattern preserves interoperability, centralized visibility, and policy levers, even when public narratives emphasize conflict. I've had to talk to my father about this a lot because we're both investors and he isn't as conspiratorial 😂. So I started doing research on examples of adversarial states working together behind the scenes and I found more than 50 widely-accepted examples since the 1900s. In reality, there are hundreds/thousands depending on how deep you want to go. I've listed the main 40 examples here: https://controlplanecapital.com/p/rivalry-between-countries-is-curated
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 5 months ago
Why Bitcoin’s 21M cap is not guaranteed - The protocol can cap issuance at 21,000,000 BTC. - Markets can create claims on far more than 21,000,000 BTC. 1) What the 21M cap does — and doesn’t — guarantee - Hard cap guarantees: the consensus rules won’t mint block rewards beyond schedule without a social revolt/chain split. That’s it. - Hard cap does not guarantee: that your brokerage note, ETF share, wrapped token, or exchange balance is backed 1:1 by spendable UTXOs. Claims can multiply without touching issuance. Synthetic supply machinery: A) Paper (futures/perps/options/swaps/ETNs) ➝ notional balloons without spot. B) Custodial wrappers/ETFs/treasury cos ➝ share lending, loose redemption, rehypothecation. C) Reuse collateral across balance sheets. D) Exchange fractionalization. E) Basis/AP games dominate price. F) Off-chain IOUs at miners/OTC. Bottom line: you can easily have 30–50M “BTC-equivalent claims” trading claims-to-claims while only ~19–21M coins exist. The protocol cap remains true; the market cap of claims does not. In other words, you can’t enforce the 21 million cap by proxy. The only real enforcers: your node, your keys, miners including your tx. Everything else is proxy exposure with policy risk. 2) Bottom line Bitcoin’s 21M cap is a protocol invariant. It is not a shield against synthetic supply created by ETFs, funds, wrappers, futures, structured notes, and rehypothecation. In a world where incentives > ideals and control > fairness, paper beats metal: claims will proliferate, upside will be contained, and the effective supply for price discovery will expand — unless enough capital insists on self-custody + verifiable reserves and pushes back on policy-driven pool/template drift. Once you see the settlement stack — on-chain BTC at the bottom, and layers of IOUs, wrappers, and derivatives on top — the rest is incentives, not ideals. More context:
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 6 months ago
The Bitcoin treasury company market is very brittle, especially for the smaller (not MSTR) companies. If you listen to Bitcoin influencers, they'll tell you that Bitcoin treasury companies found an 'infinite money glitch' - they short fiat, long Bitcoin and profit. Do these influencers not realize that the rules of the game are written by the guys who own the banks and have vested interest in the currency? Bitcoin treasury companies didn't beat the game, they are allowed to exist. If the rulers raise the price of funding, increase optical and operational pain, they can blow most of them up in very little time. With a few quick rule changes, leverage on Bitcoin can become a widow-maker for most of the smaller companies. You can see scammy treasury companies like David Bailey's buying other treasury companies. Nakamoto is buying Metaplanet and other treasury companies that are allegedly buying Bitcoin. Nakamoto's shareholders are paying the salaries of every motherfucking influencer in the Bitcoin space 😂 I have a prediction to make: before long Bitcoin treasury companies will be buying Bitcoin ETFs that are allegedly buying Bitcoin.
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 6 months ago
David Bailey's company Naka is down like 98% from the top but the execs are absolutely crushing it 😂 This guy was buying the 'dip' in August at $11 and the stock is now $0.73. The dip that keeps on dipping. image
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 6 months ago
I think it's more likely my Bitcoin 5-year price model breaks to the downside than to the upside. I wrote about Controlled Opposition Assets (to Bitcoin as MoE) - https://controlplanecapital.com/p/controlled-opposition-assets-to-bitcoin TL;DR: To de-fang Bitcoin-as-money, the Controllers oversupply substitutes that feel “hard”, “digital”, “innovative”, or “yieldy” - but live in supervised pipes. This includes: 1. Gold (esp. via ETFs/vaulted products) 2. Spot Bitcoin ETFs / futures ETPs / broker wrappers / treasury companies 3. Stablecoins & tokenized Treasuries (USD rails) 4. ETH + L2/”Web3 compute” with compliance defaults 5. AI mega-caps & the power stack (chips, hyperscalers, data centers) 6. Meme-coins/alt-L1 manias on KYC venues 7. CBDCs & digital-ID money (the end-state substitute) Obviously, Gold is the most credible Controlled Opposition asset (https://controlplanecapital.com/p/why-gold-has-been-allowed-to-run?r=6i2zjv). Gold can satisfy the public’s “store-of-value” impulse without granting a parallel, censorship-resistant payments rail; it trades in surveilled, gate-kept markets (London OTC/COMEX, custodian oligopolies). So it seems that Bitcoin's MoE threat freed Gold from the relentless price suppression and now Bitcoin is the suppressed, paperized asset. Gold soaks hedge demand from retail/institutions who prefer ETF/IRA-friendly exposure over key management. That’s deliberate crowding-out of Bitcoin as Medium of Exchange. Gold stabilizes optics & balance sheets and siphons dissent — perfect for a regime moving to identity-bound, programmable money. When I wrote my price prediction model, I assumed: if Bitcoin's price suppression is too obvious, people are just going to take self-custody. Bitcoin is much easier to take self-custody of than gold, so the Controllers are incentivized to supply a channel where "Bitcoin is never cheap enough to trigger a self-custody revolt, never euphoric enough to create escape velocity". This is still my base case, however, I now did more research on whether Bitcoin being cheap would trigger a self-custody revolt at scale and I don't think it's a given. Why “cheap” Bitcoin won’t trigger a self-custody revolt (at scale) - Learned convenience: Keys are work; ETF app is zero-friction. Habit beats ideology. - Narrative laundering: “Institutional-grade custody is safer for your family” → social proof wins. - Selective pain: If price cheapens gradually and wrappers promote yield/covered-call income, paper holders feel clever, not robbed. - Perimeter nudges: App-stores, banks, and payroll rails steer away from non-KYC wallets. Most will not route around their entire digital lives to self-custody. - Absence of a galvanizing villain: Unless a visible confiscation happens, the default is apathy + inertia. So price weakness alone is insufficient. Revolts need salient betrayal + turnkey migration UX. We’ll likely get neither. The price corridor could shift down 20-30% and still look "managed". Result: modal EOY targets compress (e.g., $190k → $140–160k in Year 5), realized vol declines, and the Sharpe looks fine - just lower trend. The down-shift tells one can watch are: - Paperization Ratio (PR) > 35–40%, trending up. - Perp premiums disappear on rallies; basis rich but spot lags. - ETF net creations slow while NAV discounts recur on stress. - Retail search/flows migrate to stables (“yield” beats “digital gold” in social data). Regulated stables on T-bill rails can offer sticky 3–5% realish yields + embedded refunds/rebates; they'd become the everyday MoE and savings default. The Bitcoin as SoV-only campaign while pumping Controlled Opposition assets (mostly Gold, AI stocks) is exactly what crushes Bitcoin's volatility to the upside over time. When ETFs/notes/treasuries + futures grow to, say, 35–45% of circulating supply; basis and options overwrite become the profit center for the largest intermediaries. So tops are sold harder and floors defended less because wrapper sponsors maximize carry, not price. The trend of the Paperization ratio is the thing to watch. If it goes up, the plebs are losing. If it goes down, the plebs are winning. View article →
Control-Plane Capital's avatar
buckyfonds 6 months ago
Michael Saylor diverting attention away from Bitcoin as MoE by comparing it to Ethereum, Solana and BNB is crazy 😂 Kind of makes sense when you analyze his role from the start: - Saylor’s role: normalized paperized exposure (through MSTR); now pushes “BTC = Store of Value (not Medium of Exchange)” which aligns with containment. Refuses Proof-of-Reserves normalization that would discipline the entire paper stack. Imagine if MSTR normalized Proof-of-Reserves, then most, if not all Bitcoin treasury companies would have to follow. If Saylor gets out of line → eligibility, margin, audit, or index levers can punish MSTR. Everyone understands the boundary. image More context: https://controlplanecapital.com/p/why-microstrategys-best-days-are