LOL! That article is from 6 months ago. Gavin has always been very clear that his major concern was the scalability of BTC, which remains to be proven.
As for divesting some of his BTC as he is not interested in being 'filthy rich' (his owrds) and still holds enough to be seriously wealthy, what exactly is the problem with this? Sensible move. Once you have made 'enough' do you seriously expect any sane person to leave it all on black or red? (I know there is not so much sanity in here, so I can understand why it is perceived differently ...)
As for divesting some of his BTC as he is not interested in being 'filthy rich' (his owrds) and still holds enough to be seriously wealthy, what exactly is the problem with this? Sensible move. Once you have made 'enough' do you seriously expect any sane person to leave it all on black or red? (I know there is not so much sanity in here, so I can understand why it is perceived differently ...)
Talk about missing the point. Not sure why the age of the article matters.
He has a massive conflict of interest as chief scientist speaking to the media. He shouldn't be talking speculation end of.
Imagine if the ceo of an up and coming company was speaking to the media and said "I believe in this company and I'm putting my all into it, however I'm also selling stocks of my company and investing in others".
Sure, that's prudent. That's also what most big share holders would do but you just don't say that. As I said PR nightmare and a massive conflict of interest.
and how about a conflict of interest since working for the US gov?
cant wait for him to be totally dismissed from bitcoin's community.