Currency nature of Bitcoin

[shepherd_gee]

The world is still deciding what Bitcoin does as well as how is should be classified, after it's inception twelve years ago . Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

[1714586356]

1714586356

[bayu7adi]

Well, you see, this might not align with Satoshi Nakamoto's original vision, but most folks are quite fond of Bitcoin because of its tradability. Insisting that Bitcoin should only serve transactional purposes, I believe, wouldn't have garnered the same massive user base we see today. I also don't think this falls into the realm of product flaws, as a matter of fact, there's little objection to Bitcoin being used as a speculative asset, with some even drawing comparisons to gold. Could Bitcoin's journey into maturity be unfolding prematurely?

What matters most is the utility. Embrace Bitcoin if it simplifies your life and has a positive impact on it.

[_act_]

Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

You can send bitcoin to anyone at anytime. If bitcoin is not adopted like fiat, it is still an asset that its value is increasing and you can send it to anyone. It is a currency.

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

And it is. There are many companies that you can use bitcoin as payment and some other companies are working on that.

With bitcoin on noncustodial wallet, you are still your own bank.

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash.

The scalability issue is not the reason people see bitcoin as a store of value, it is because after long period of time, its price do not fall below the previous price.

[Jegileman]

The world is still deciding what Bitcoin does as well as how is should be classified, after it's inception twelve years ago . Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

If you continue to uphold bitcoin on all of the points you've raised, you'll always have an excuse not to embrace it. What matters most is the good influence it has on the financial system, whether as a store of value, speculative asset, or alternative to fiat currency. If you've accepted it, you must have seen and comprehended what it implies. Anonymity, privacy, security, and complete financial ownership are all compelling reasons to embrace it.

[mk4]

The world is still deciding what Bitcoin does as well as how is should be classified, after it's inception twelve years ago . Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

Bitcoin is global. Not because it's mainly paired with the USD doesn't automatically mean it's totally reliant with the US banks. Heck, even other currencies' trading pairs are mainly with the USD, and it doesn't make them not-currencies.

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

The thing is, you don't expect everyone to be convinced this easily for such a big paradigm shift. Everyone is simply too used to trusting banks and centralized entities in general. Bitcoin being decentralized is just not much of an easy concept to grasp.

[Tony116]

Well, you see, this might not align with Satoshi Nakamoto's original vision, but most folks are quite fond of Bitcoin because of its tradability. Insisting that Bitcoin should only serve transactional purposes, I believe, wouldn't have garnered the same massive user base we see today. I also don't think this falls into the realm of product flaws, as a matter of fact, there's little objection to Bitcoin being used as a speculative asset, with some even drawing comparisons to gold. Could Bitcoin's journey into maturity be unfolding prematurely?

What matters most is the utility. Embrace Bitcoin if it simplifies your life and has a positive impact on it.

Bitcoin does not need to follow Satoshi's original plan for it to be more perfect. What's more important is that people accept and use it even though it cannot become the currency Satoshi wanted. If bitcoin stabilizes and is used as a peer-to-peer currency as it was originally intended, but people are not interested in it and it will not achieve any significant growth. So it makes no sense for it to become currency when people reject it.

Bitcoin has grown as an asset and gained a lot of support because it actually brings a lot of benefits to being an asset. I really don't understand why some people still see it as a bad thing for bitcoin. Furthermore, even though bitcoin is an asset, we can still use it as currency in necessary cases such as cross-border money transfers. The peer-to-peer currency nature of bitcoin has never been lost even when it is used as an asset and investment.

[Despairo]

Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

It's because you're see Bitcoin price in USD or fiat equivalent, if you use BTC equivalent this will change your perspective if 1 BTC = 1 BTC, just like $1 = $1. If you still compare Bitcoin price in USD equivalent, I don't think you will use Bitcoin as a currency.

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

Scalability has been discussed since few years ago and it has been pointed out if lightning network can solve this problem.

But the problem isn't only scalability, but most of countries are not willing to accept Bitcoin payment and there's a privacy concern for use Bitcoin, people will think you're rich if you have Bitcoin. It's really different the reaction of people around you when you pay something using cash or credit card and Bitcoin.

[Darker45]

Well, you're probably right. Bitcoin has indeed evolved somehow, or at least its function. It now plays additional roles, other than those which the founder might have intended. But these new functions like as a new asset class, an intergenerational wealth storage, a legal tender, possibly as a reserve currency in the future, and so on aren't far-fetched even from the get-go. As a matter of fact, these are still basically direct results of how Bitcoin is specifically designed.

Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

It's because you're see Bitcoin price in USD or fiat equivalent, if you use BTC equivalent this will change your perspective if 1 BTC = 1 BTC, just like $1 = $1. If you still compare Bitcoin price in USD equivalent, I don't think you will use Bitcoin as a currency.

I've used Bitcoin as a currency, just like many of us here, but I "still compare Bitcoin price in USD equivalent". Is there anybody who doesn't do that? We're all Bitcoin supporters here, but we're also highly affected by Bitcoin's assigned USD price at the same time. To deny that is pointless.

[Fiatless]

The world is still deciding what Bitcoin does as well as how is should be classified, after it's inception twelve years ago . Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

The dollar is the most popular currency and most currencies are valued or supported by the USD. Bitcoin is a speculative asset because its price is not relatively stable in the short run but keeping it for long-term can be profitable.

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

Bitcoin is still a young currency that is gradually gaining global recognition. Harsh government policies have limited its popularity and acceptance. The coin will gain its natural currency nature if it becomes more acceptable worldwide.

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

The belief that bitcoin transaction fees is high is debatable because it is not applicable in all situation or different locations. Timing the mempool to know when the transaction fee is low and using the lighting network will be some good options.

[pooya87]

Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

Wrong.
Bitcoin is a currency and in the sense of its trading volume it is like any other currency. What you said is like saying that "Yuan is supported by USD bank liquidity just because there is a USD/CNY pair in Forex market".

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

It is rising with increasing doubts about the reliability of the banking system. The reason why you aren't seeing it is because you think everything is summarized in bitcoin's price! Whereas the adoption is still increasing every day even if the manipulated market because of the deepening recession in US isn't showing it.

[Abu-Naim]

The world is still deciding what Bitcoin does as well as how is should be classified, after it's inception twelve years ago . Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

Bitcoin value is not supported by any currency like USD or so, it has its value and it remain the same, just that the other currencies that is been related to it is to estimate its value when converting it to any fiat currency, USD is mostly used because it is a currency that is famous and mostly used world wide.

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

Bitcoin is an alternative currency to fiat that store value and it kick against banking monetary system because you will control your money your self.
Again, it is not been affected by inflation like other fiat currencies, therefore, I will like you to learn more about Bitcoin.

[DaNNy001]

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

I think the problem of Bitcoin scalability is already been handled although the approach to it's adoption is a bit low since its implementation but I think with times adoption will drastically grow in mass and by this I mean the Bitcoin lightning network which was a resolution method to solve the problem of Bitcoin scalability.

For me it really doesn't matter because Bitcoin can be used as a store of value or as alternative means to fiat but the fact still remains that the primary goals of its creation is still in achievement which is the decentralization of a currency without the intervention of any third party involved to condition and restrict individual of their money.

[taufik123]

I think the problem of Bitcoin scalability is already been handled although the approach to it's adoption is a bit low since its implementation but I think with times adoption will drastically grow in mass and by this I mean the Bitcoin lightning network which was a resolution method to solve the problem of Bitcoin scalability.
-snip-

To overcome the scalability problem Bitcoin is already available with the Bitcoin Lightning Network which provides transaction speed, low fees, and is more efficient.
But behind it all the Lightning Network is still in the development stage and several dilemmas about the difficulty of developing the Lightning network must make Antoine Riard resign from the development of the Lightning Network, citing security issues and fundamental challenges to the Bitcoin ecosystem.

This is a difficult dilemma and makes the role of the Lightning Network fade.

Antoine Riard said that he wanted to focus on developing Bitcoin Core.

But in my opinion, even though the development of the Bitcoin Lightning Network is quite difficult, there will definitely be a solution to overcome it.
Bitcoin developers are not only Antonie but there are still many who can do it well.
technology can still continue to be developed and there will be a solution later.

Source:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-core-developer-antoine-riard-steps-back-lightning-network-dilemma

[icalical]

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

You made a good point, especially about the scalability and fee issue. But all of them is not unfixable, even though bitcoin was invented 12 years ago bitcoin mainstream adoption has only been made significant improve for a few years back and it hasn't stop. And with more adoption, the community will find a way to resolve the scalability and fee problem, currently we already have lightning network and SegWit, I am confident that we will solve all major technical issue, what I am more afraid of is the political problem that might obstruct bitcoin way for more global adoption.

[hugeblack]

You cannot imagine that any decentralized network will perform at the same speed as central networks, no matter how developed it is. Therefore, Bitcoin will not be able to reach the limits of transactions that occur in central networks.

Bitcoin will not move to become an alternative to traditional paper currencies, but rather, since its design, its primary goal has been a decentralized P2P cryptocurrency without need a third party controlling it.

The transition of the currency to become an independent currency requires stages. Bitcoin must currently be represented by the price of the dollar but when the market capacity increase it can be something independent like gold.

We are still in the early days. It has not been 15 years, while the adoption of USD took a longer time, just like the adoption of many things.

[fuguebtc]

-.-

-.-
... what I am more afraid of is the political problem that might obstruct bitcoin way for more global adoption.

I believe that bitcoin was also created from conflicts and disagreements over political opinions, so I would not be surprised if politics is what will prevent bitcoin from becoming popular. Every feature and characteristic of bitcoin goes against what the government is creating, they create everything with the general notion that everything should be centralized, while bitcoin is a decentralized technology. So it's no surprise that bitcoin will have difficulty gaining popularity. But can they stop bitcoin? As far as we can see, their plan is slowly failing because people are using bitcoin more and more every day.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

The world is still deciding what Bitcoin does as well as how is should be classified, after it's inception twelve years ago . Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

You don't need to rely on others, banks to use your bitcoins in a way you prefer.

Do you know about a first transaction between two people, peer to peer, on-chain, Satoshi Nakamoto and Hal Finney?
Did they need any bank to accept bitcoin to make that transaction?
Did they need to have any USD liquidity pool to make it?

Payment No. 1: A Closer Look at the Very First Bitcoin Transfer.

Did lazlo need any thing else to make his trade for 2 pizzas?
Pizza for bitcoins?

[TravelMug]

The world is still deciding what Bitcoin does as well as how is should be classified, after it's inception twelve years ago . Practically, Bitcoin isn't isolated from the traditional banking system because its price is supported by USD bank liquidity making its trade as a speculative asset rather than a currency.

What do you mean here? just group of nations decided what's best for bitcoin? Or the investors themselves? whether institutions or average joe retail investors like the rest of us here?

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

In the Whitepaper, he wanted bitcoin to be a payment system first. However, it evolved in the last 12 years, and it become a asset and so we think of it as a alternatie to fiat currencies now.

After all, Bitcoin network suffers from scalability issues and high transaction fees, leading many to believe that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than an alternative form of cash. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency, we're faced with a more futuristic form of money

Check Mempool, fees are set to 2 sat/vByte, so it's quite cheap as contrary to your claims that fees are expensive. Besides it's borderless, you can send to as far as Timbukto or whatever region in the world and they can received it in matter of hours. As compare to let's say you used remittances services like Western Union, minimum 3-5 days.

[Fundamentals Of]

Satoshi Natamoto envisioned Bitcoin as an alternative to traditional fiat currencies. If Bitcoin had been trading on its core value proposition - the ability to be your own bank - then Bitcoin would have rallied with rising bank uncertainty

In the Whitepaper, he wanted bitcoin to be a payment system first. However, it evolved in the last 12 years, and it become a asset and so we think of it as a alternatie to fiat currencies now.

Bitcoin being an alternative to fiat currencies didn't just happen now or recently. I think Bitcoin was already an alternative to fiat currencies since its birth. It's a payment system. Fiat is the current payment system. Bitcoin came in as a new and futuristic alternative.

That it became an asset class is perhaps new because such perception of Bitcoin means many would rather collect and keep it than spend it as a real world money. But being an asset class does not mean it has now grown into an alternative to fiat currencies.

[pinggoki]

What matters most is the utility. Embrace Bitcoin if it simplifies your life and has a positive impact on it.

If what you're saying is true then that would mean that bitcoin would be better off as a currency that's traded by people for goods and services because in principle that's going to garner the most utility compared to being a store of value. But you're right on your second statement though, that I can wholly agree.

Regarding my stance on what bitcoin should be, I would better off have bitcoin be a store of value because paper currency isn't going anywhere anytime soon and seeing how I can potentially make money with bitcoin being a store of value instead of a currency, I'd choose it to be that way for now, maybe it will change when I see the good in bitcoin being a currency.