Is Bitcoin truly losing its identity?

[Alpha Marine]

So I've been seeing a lot of talks about how Bitcoin has lost or is losing its identity because it is now regarded as an asset and not as a currency. I used to see the discourse a lot before but recently I've been seeing it more (don't know if it's just me). I have made a couple of replies on posts related to something like this on the forum.
So I really want to understand how Bitcoin has lost its identity.
There is nothing that has stopped bitcoin from being used as a currency. Certain factors make it difficult for businesses to accept bitcoin as a means of payment but I don't think the fact that it's regarded as an asset is one of them

From what I understand, these two features are not mutually exclusive. In the sense that Bitcoin can be an asset and can also be a currency. Just as the dollar is an asset and also a current. The difference, Bitcoin is a better asset than the dollar. I was not opportune or smart enough to be among the early adopters of bitcoin, so I'm going to ask a question to people who were, was there ever a time that people bought bitcoin for the sole purpose of using it just as a currency?
Like when they bought the coin, they had no expectation or hope of bitcoin appreciating so they could make a profit? I doubt that and if they did, then Bitcoin was always an asset from the beginning and also a currency.
So at what point did bitcoin start losing its identity?

[Ambatman]

I would just use Gresham law where he states bad money(fiat) would remove Good money(Bitcoin) from the market.
I wouldn't state that Bitcoin has lost its identity because it's still decentralization
But with its scalabilty and attractiveness as a store of value
Many option to hold it while making Fiat for their everyday transactions
This doesn't mean Bitcoin isn't used as a means of Payment.

I pity who holds Dollar as an asset.

[_act_]

so I'm going to ask a question to people who were, was there ever a time that people bought bitcoin for the sole purpose of using it just as a currency?

People will buy bitcoin because of its price and value that is increasing. But that does not mean bitcoin can not be used as currency.

An instance is if you do not have fiat and you want to pay someone money and the person can accept bitcoin, you can decide to pay him from your bitcoin investment instead of converting to fiat first.

Another instance is when you want to send money to your family or friend in abroad and you do not want the annoying fiat payment and decide to use bitcoin instead for the transaction.

Can you see now that mnothing takes bitcoin being a currency.

[mindrust]

Who cares what other people think of bitcoin? It only matters what btc means to you and how you are using it. Some people indeed use it to store value or trade it like a stock. That doesn’t mean you should too. If you are using btc to pay for products and services then it means you are using it like a currency. Lots of different people find value in btc and they use it differently. We can’t stop people from trading bitcoin like it is another stock. They creating liquidity in the markets and they are also helping with the crypto adoption.

[Obim34]

If we say losing its identity then we should be wrong, even with the sole creation as a currency forming a hedge against centralized system,  i believe identity can be shifted but not totally removed. Just as a currency alone, less or few people would have been a part of this journey, what has successfully moved a lot of people towards adopting Bitcoin is due to its ability to give profits when controlled like an asset.

With the recent knowledge and advancement, we can see different institutions beginning to accept Bitcoin as a standard payment option, this means the ideology about issuing as a currency is also advancing, El Salvador already adopted as a legal tender, now the US are attempting a bill as a reserve fund, everything surrounding Bitcoin benefits is showing signs of improvement and more adoption is possible as time continues.

[Silberman]

So I've been seeing a lot of talks about how Bitcoin has lost or is losing its identity because it is now regarded as an asset and not as a currency. I used to see the discourse a lot before but recently I've been seeing it more (don't know if it's just me). I have made a couple of replies on posts related to something like this on the forum.
So I really want to understand how Bitcoin has lost its identity.
There is nothing that has stopped bitcoin from being used as a currency. Certain factors make it difficult for businesses to accept bitcoin as a means of payment but I don't think the fact that it's regarded as an asset is one of them

From what I understand, these two features are not mutually exclusive. In the sense that Bitcoin can be an asset and can also be a currency. Just as the dollar is an asset and also a current. The difference, Bitcoin is a better asset than the dollar. I was not opportune or smart enough to be among the early adopters of bitcoin, so I'm going to ask a question to people who were, was there ever a time that people bought bitcoin for the sole purpose of using it just as a currency?
Like when they bought the coin, they had no expectation or hope of bitcoin appreciating so they could make a profit? I doubt that and if they did, then Bitcoin was always an asset from the beginning and also a currency.
So at what point did bitcoin start losing its identity?

There is no point to listen to those people as they do not know what they are talking about, if you take a look at the history of money, you will see the first currencies were called commodity money, which means that people at the time simply began to use a popular commodity as a currency in order to facilitate trade, then there is nothing wrong with bitcoin being a great asset, and if anything this should just make its case for becoming a widely used for of money all over the world even stronger.

[shield132]

So I've been seeing a lot of talks about how Bitcoin has lost or is losing its identity because it is now regarded as an asset and not as a currency. I used to see the discourse a lot before but recently I've been seeing it more (don't know if it's just me). I have made a couple of replies on posts related to something like this on the forum.
So I really want to understand how Bitcoin has lost its identity.
There is nothing that has stopped bitcoin from being used as a currency. Certain factors make it difficult for businesses to accept bitcoin as a means of payment but I don't think the fact that it's regarded as an asset is one of them

From what I understand, these two features are not mutually exclusive. In the sense that Bitcoin can be an asset and can also be a currency. Just as the dollar is an asset and also a current. The difference, Bitcoin is a better asset than the dollar. I was not opportune or smart enough to be among the early adopters of bitcoin, so I'm going to ask a question to people who were, was there ever a time that people bought bitcoin for the sole purpose of using it just as a currency?
Like when they bought the coin, they had no expectation or hope of bitcoin appreciating so they could make a profit? I doubt that and if they did, then Bitcoin was always an asset from the beginning and also a currency.
So at what point did bitcoin start losing its identity?

Bitcoin was an anonymous currency, a decade ago it was almost impossible to track Bitcoin transactions but now we have found that there are flaws and blockchain analysis companies are getting better with tracking.
We had a KYC-free service years ago and now almost every bitcoin-related business asks their users to submit KYC documents.
Years ago we could mine Bitcoin at home but today it's a commercial business and only big mining companies can mine it.
Bitcoin mixers were legal and now you are a criminal if you use them.
Decentralized Exchanges are also getting banned.
What's the next step?
This is why I think that Bitcoin is losing its identity.

[kryptqnick]

I believe that largely the object's purpose is defined by its usage. Sure, maybe it wasn't the initially intended purpose, but if it works fine and finds it demand, why not? Theatre used to be mass entertainment, sort of like cinemas or even Netflix is now, but now theatre is this highly intellectual thing for people who appreciate culture. Its function changed over time, but we don't say it lost its identity.
Bitcoin can still be a currency for some people, for some purchases, and in some contexts. For many it's more of an asset, though, and it makes sense, considering how much Bitcoin is growing in value over time. So yes, the two aren't mutually exclusive.

[SamReomo]

So at what point did bitcoin start losing its identity?

Well, Bitcoin hasn't lost its identity at all and it will never lose it even in future. Bitcoin was always an asset and a digital currency, and it will always remain as an asset and also a digital currency.

It depends on the mindset of the ones who buy it, if they buy it for holding then it's an asset for them, but if they buy it to purchase goods with it then it works as a way of payments for them.

[BITCOIN4X]

For most users, I think bitcoin is still a better alternative currency. I'd never know if anyone here has adopted bitcoin as a primary currency in their daily lives, but I think it's unlikely there is. This adoption depends on local regulations, so use cases are hampered by this, especially if the government has not legalized it.

Bitcoin does not lose its identity as a currency, even if you cannot use it as currency in your country. Until now I have not been able to use bitcoin as a currency or means of payment in my country, this is because regulations in my country have not legalized bitcoin as a legal means of payment. While in many other countries, bitcoin has been used as a means of payment and I really don't agree when someone says bitcoin is losing its identity.

[Wonder Work]

There is nothing to be disappointed about Bitcoin's ups and downs. If you dump a little, you will see many people making many comments and wondering if Bitcoin is really losing its existence, but I have one thing to say, is it so easy that it dumped a little and lost its true identity. Isn't it kind of stupid to think like that?

There will be a market volatility, we will never make such comments because Bitcoin is a permanent coin, it is kind of stupid to make different comments about it. Have faith in it and it will do you good in the long run. Wait and see with patience, then you will understand what situation it will lead to.

[Fiatless]

So at what point did bitcoin start losing its identity?

Bitcoin will always remain an alternative to fiat and I dont think it will ever lose its identity. Many people use Bitcoin as an asset and a hedge against inflation but there are still people who use it as a currency. Some countries have some restrictions placed on banking activities. In my country, you might not be allowed to transfer more than a certain amount per day. There are some businessmen who use Bitcoin to pay their business partners. While some individuals see it as the best means to carry out international business transactions. However, due to its high volatility and unfavorable government policies, might continue to be used as an asset.     

[Smartvirus]

So I've been seeing a lot of talks about how Bitcoin has lost or is losing its identity because it is now regarded as an asset and not as a currency. I used to see the discourse a lot before but recently I've been seeing it more (don't know if it's just me). I have made a couple of replies on posts related to something like this on the forum.
So I really want to understand how Bitcoin has lost its identity.

If lost in your own terms is based on what your insinuating, then you it has to some extent to you and that’s to you.

Even now, it’s not out of context for a commodity to have it serve several purposes,
In the real estate, a property could serve housing purposes or being used as a store house or some place of business and in the same time, it retains value as an asset. That doesn’t limit it to certain functions based on where it’s most frequently used.

Same applies here with Bitcoin,
We must come to terms with the fact that, it’s an evolving commodity and means to finance that is still trying to attain mainstream use and its limited supply provides investors with opportunity to make the most of it while they can, hence the idea of hodling.

[franky1]

currencies can be anything
its an umbrella term for anything and everything thats used as a medium of exchange

there are commodity currencies, asset currencies, money currencies, etc
heck even in relationships, women can use sex as a currency

the issue is not that bitcoin is losing identity. its that most new users are the young whom have no economics knowledge of identifying things using economic terms correctly.

commodities are traditionally raw materials used to create other products so as for bitcoins status and utility, bitcoin 2009-2017 was a asset currency as it was its own sole product. however with protocol upgrades allowed bitcoin to be also a base unit to then generate other silly data and tokens for subnetworks so became a commodity currency aswell

bitcoin became BOTH a asset and commodity currency dependant on which market it is used
gold also sits in both categories of currencies(store of value market + raw material for manufacturing market)

[BlackHatCoiner]

So I really want to understand how Bitcoin has lost its identity.

Bitcoin is the epitome of individual liberty. Its identity is derived from the freedom to define it yourself. It's just that it is now increasingly regarded as an asset.

It is not often very attractive means of payment, because of volatility and on-chain cost, but depending the case, it can be far more comfortable to use than other mediums of exchange. For example, sending money electronically, from one country to the other, or if you want final settlement within 10 minutes, or privacy, or [endless list].  

[MeGold666]

Bitcoin is not commonly used as a currency because it is too slow or too expensive if you want your tx to have priority, and this will only worsen over time unless the protocol is updated through a hard fork - which is unlikely to ever happen.

Just go with the flow and treat it as an asset. It will never become a practical option for small purchases due to high fees, nor for large purchases due to a lack of privacy.

But hey, that's just my opinion - everyone has one, just like everyone has an ass and you are free to use it as you want.

[franky1]

Bitcoin is not commonly used as a currency

bitcoin is used as currency... thats the whole point of the blockchain to log and transcribe the transfers

i think you mean its not commonly used as a domestic money/international money/niche community money/common money

[Spaceman1000$]

So I've been seeing a lot of talks about how Bitcoin has lost or is losing its identity because it is now regarded as an asset and not as a currency. I used to see the discourse a lot before but recently I've been seeing it more (don't know if it's just me). I have made a couple of replies on posts related to something like this on the forum.
So I really want to understand how Bitcoin has lost its identity.
There is nothing that has stopped bitcoin from being used as a currency. Certain factors make it difficult for businesses to accept bitcoin as a means of payment but I don't think the fact that it's regarded as an asset is one of them

From what I understand, these two features are not mutually exclusive. In the sense that Bitcoin can be an asset and can also be a currency. Just as the dollar is an asset and also a current. The difference, Bitcoin is a better asset than the dollar. I was not opportune or smart enough to be among the early adopters of bitcoin, so I'm going to ask a question to people who were, was there ever a time that people bought bitcoin for the sole purpose of using it just as a currency?
Like when they bought the coin, they had no expectation or hope of bitcoin appreciating so they could make a profit? I doubt that and if they did, then Bitcoin was always an asset from the beginning and also a currency.
So at what point did bitcoin start losing its identity?

People always like to run along with the wrong narrative, right from the onset bitcoin has always been a digital currency that has the potential of appreciating in value over time, although i haven't read about any story concerning bitcoin losing its identity, because for anybody to come up with that kind of concept clearly shows that the person hasn't been involved with cryptocurrency or bitcoin anytime. Bitcoin can be stored as an asset that appreciate over time and bitcoin can as well be used as a digital currency, there are lots of outlets out there that accept payment in Bitcoin so at what point did bitcoin lose its identity?

[348Judah]

So I've been seeing a lot of talks about how Bitcoin has lost or is losing its identity because it is now regarded as an asset and not as a currency.

How many times are we going to keep on emphasizing that we may not have to totally agrees with what other people are saying over the internet about bitcoin, a normal person who has the knowledge of what bitcoin is and how it was been invented by it creator will not come up with the idea of it losing its identity without having anything to back things up, so far so good, bitcoin is both an investment asset and a digital currency which is decentralized and there is nothing anyone can do about these than to let it remain as it has always been.

[Natalim]

Bitcoin is not losing its identity, it’s only innovating to become more effective and productive. In fact, it becomes even more valuable than just sticking to only one method. The important thing is, bitcoin can actively perform in both ways, to act as an asset when needed and to be considered as a currency in countries where bitcoin is accepted as a payment method.