Our NewsletterInvestor RelationsOur NewsletterInvestor RelationsOur NewsletterInvestor RelationsOur NewsletterInvestor RelationsOur NewsletterInvestor RelationsOur NewsletterInvestor Relations
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
Image Coinbase’s Brian Armstrong and the French Central Bank: a new gap at Davos

Coinbase’s Brian Armstrong and the French Central Bank: a new gap at Davos

Timer1 min read

  • Ethereum

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong corrected the Governor of the Banque de France on a basic point about Bitcoin’s architecture: it has no issuer and operates as a truly decentralised protocol, independent of any single authority. François Villeroy de Galhau’s comment that he “trusts independent central banks (…) more than private issuers of Bitcoin” revealed a conceptual blind spot—one that runs deeper than semantics and speaks to a broader issue in traditional finance.

This exchange is symptomatic of an “old guard” that, despite decades of monetary policy experience, has not engaged with Bitcoin on its own technological terms. Under Bitcoin’s architecture, miners are not akin to issuers: their distribution prevents them from setting the rules. Bitcoin is a network secured by cryptographic consensus, whose rules are public, verifiable, and immutable by design. Confusing it with a privately issued claim reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the protocol’s innovation.

As we argued in The Node last week, the hesitancy (or inability?) of some senior policymakers or otherwise savvy commentators to acknowledge this technological distinction reflects not just regulatory caution, but a gap in conceptual grounding. Bitcoin represents a break from the post-gold monetary order precisely because it embeds independent verification into its core code, rather than relying on discretionary policy. When influential voices conflate decentralisation with private issuance or distrust the technology on that basis, they slow constructive engagement and meaningful policy work.

Only through technological literacy, and not assumption, can the future of money be debated thoughtfully. The public deserves policymakers who are willing to do at least the minimum homework when it comes to innovations that are already being adopted globally.

Written by
Jérémy Le Bescont Author Picture
Jeremy Le Bescont
Published on23 Jan 2026

Related articles

Welcome to CoinShares

Personal data

0102

When you visit CoinShares website, cookies enhance your experience. They help us to show you more relevant content. Some cookies are necessary for the site to work and will always be active. Blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the website and the services which we offer on our website.

We use cookies on our site to optimize our services. Learn more about our EU cookie policy or US cookie policy.

  • Necessary
    Question circle icon
  • Preferences
    Question circle icon
  • Statistical
    Question circle icon
  • Marketing
    Question circle icon