Ah, Is bitcoin loosing his identity and characters gradually?

[BitcSeo]

Will keep you updated!

Quote : ...when you cannot beat the system, you join the system...


Thanks

[BitGoba]

I don’t see how Bitcoin can ever lose its identity. It’s a decentralized monetary protocol anyone can run their own node and be their own bank. Anyone can use money without censorship or needing permission. It’s money that simply can’t be devalued by governments or central banks.You can’t stop BlackRock, Michael Saylor, or anyone else from saving in Bitcoin if that’s what they want to do. No one has the power to prevent people from using Bitcoin as a store of value.You can’t stop people from saving in Bitcoin and treating it as digital gold, if that’s what they want to do.

Money has three main use cases:

Medium of exchange – we use money to trade goods and services

Unit of account – we use money to measure value

Store of value – we save money for future use, to exchange for goods and services later

As long as people keep running their own nodes,and tens of thousands already do around the world,Bitcoin remains secure and never loses its identity.

[Reatim]

I don’t see how Bitcoin can ever lose its identity.

i guess op is pertaining about how bitcoin is used and perceived now which is very different from the initial purpose that satoshi had in mind or how he used it before

he wanted an alternative currency that is decentralized, independent of the government but now people are buying bitcoin through etfs and centralized exchanges and holding them there

people are more focused in making profit now than actually having a currency to use aside from fiat

[Ultegra134]

Am I missing something here? Just a title, no context, doesn't specify why Bitcoin is losing its identity as he claims, just a quote. From the little information we have, I'm guessing that the OP is referring to the fact that Bitcoin is considered more as an asset than a currency, which wasn't Satoshi's plan. Perhaps the OP should "update" us

[stadus]

I only remember that phrase being used in the NBA when Durant couldn’t beat the Warriors, so he joined them and ended up winning a championship with them.

But with Bitcoin, it’s a different story. It’s a coin that actually has competition, and you can clearly see that in its dominance rate. The reason others are called altcoins (alternatives) is because they can’t really replace Bitcoin. And when Bitcoin goes down, the whole crypto market usually follows.

It’s kind of like how Bitcoin is seen as an alternative to fiat but it still hasn’t fully replaced fiat either.

[skarais]

Am I missing something here? Just a title, no context, doesn't specify why Bitcoin is losing its identity as he claims, just a quote. From the little information we have, I'm guessing that the OP is referring to the fact that Bitcoin is considered more as an asset than a currency, which wasn't Satoshi's plan. Perhaps the OP should "update" us

I just posted elsewhere stating that bitcoin was not created to replace the existing financial system, so I don't know why someone would say that bitcoin has lost its identity simply because it is unable to dominate the existing financial system. I agree that the OP needs to update some information, but I am not surprised by the fact that bitcoin is not really meant to replace the existing financial system.

Bitcoin as an alternative payment tool besides fiat, but some people want something bigger considering the existing financial system is very bad. I personally do not want bitcoin to replace it, both can be used for the same purpose and coexist.

[Botnake]

Am I missing something here? Just a title, no context, doesn't specify why Bitcoin is losing its identity as he claims, just a quote. From the little information we have, I'm guessing that the OP is referring to the fact that Bitcoin is considered more as an asset than a currency, which wasn't Satoshi's plan. Perhaps the OP should "update" us

Same with my thoughts. It’s like the phrase is left hanging without clear context. So if this is all about using bitcoin as an asset more than as a currency, I don’t think that should be a problem. We will eventually reach that point where bitcoin, if not as a global currency, at least it can co-exist with fiat and is totally accepted in majority of the shops and stores.

For now, let’s settle first on having bitcoin as an investment. For sure, Satoshi is still happy with how things are going with his invention. The fact that it gained the highest demand when it comes to investment nowadays, that’s something that any inventor will be proud of.

[PX-Z]

I'm guessing that the OP is referring to the fact that Bitcoin is considered more as an asset than a currency, which wasn't Satoshi's plan.

It is. Bitcoin now is not what its used to, aside from having thousands of value and stronger network. As Bitcoin ages, it inevitably changes in character compared to its early, idealistic day. The censorship, regulatory dependent, privacy, even price is heavily influenced by just one person, or institutional investors as well as unrelated events. So yes, it's lossing its characters and everyone knows it, especially the OGs.

[sheenshane]

Quote : ...when you cannot beat the system, you join the system...

It's a nice quote for those countries that always ban Bitcoin.
From time to time, instead of continuing to fight against Bitcoin or ignoring it, many sectors of the traditional financial system have started to embrace it, and now most of the governments have come to this realization and have adopted Bitcoin instead of banning it.

However, it may be that Bitcoin is gradually losing its identity and character as governments implement regulations to control and legitimize its usage.  
They now want to "join the system" once more to convert Bitcoin into fiat currency, pay taxes, or engage with everyday financial services.

[batang_bitcoin]

Will keep you updated!

Quote : ...when you cannot beat the system, you join the system...


Thanks

Those quotes are intended for the competitors of it. For example, PayPal, it's joined the bandwagon and are now enjoying the perks of it because many of their customers are also into Bitcoin. They've joined the system because they know that they cannot beat it. And so, if you're going to keep this thread updated. It's for sure that you're going to put this quote relative to these financial institutions and payment processors did for adopting Bitcoin.

[Jegileman]

Am I missing something here? Just a title, no context, doesn't specify why Bitcoin is losing its identity as he claims, just a quote. From the little information we have, I'm guessing that the OP is referring to the fact that Bitcoin is considered more as an asset than a currency, which wasn't Satoshi's plan. Perhaps the OP should "update" us

This I also feel is one of the reason the OP made that the title of the topic, but I am also seeing what he meant again as how bitcoin is already been affected by news of the world most of the time. Due to many economy news coming up since Trump was swore in, it has in one way or the other affected the market trend and we have not seen bitcoin staying in such manner for quite too long that it should when we are already in the bull season. So OP may think that Bitcoin could not beat the government and had to join them but in my own opinion, bitcoin is not built to replace fiat but to serve as alternative to it which it is not embraced for that yet but embraced more by the people as an investable asset.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Bitcoin as a network hasn't lost any identity or purpose in this case. The purpose for which Bitcoin was created over 16 years is still the same today. How you decide to use Bitcoin is up to you, but that does not mean Bitcoin will lose its identity. Has the Bitcoin network stopped being decentralized for starters?

We have Big corporations and Traditional financial institutions fooling people into investing in the ETFs while the same corps actually buy the real Bitcoins using client's money and hoard it. At the same time, we have exchanges where you can buy Bitcoin, move it to your noncustodial wallet and keep it there independently of any third party. You can also buy and pay for services using Bitcoin through a peer to peer means. All these are choices that are available, so how do you say that Bitcoin is losing its identity?

[luckyspirit]

No, Bitcoin is the same as it always has been. It is barely changing, but the ideas behind it remind set in stone. You can't prevent the system from adopting Bitcoin, that goes against the ideas that Bitcoin stands for. Any kind of prevention would make it centralized and it would no longer be a permission-less system.

Bitcoin as a network hasn't lost any identity or purpose in this case. The purpose for which Bitcoin was created over 16 years is still the same today. How you decide to use Bitcoin is up to you, but that does not mean Bitcoin will lose its identity. Has the Bitcoin network stopped being decentralized for starters?

It has not, buying Bitcoin does not have an impact on its decentralization. It is not related to who owns how much Bitcoin. That is something else, distribution of holdings.

[Darker45]

I'm guessing that the OP is referring to the fact that Bitcoin is considered more as an asset than a currency, which wasn't Satoshi's plan.

It is. Bitcoin now is not what its used to, aside from having thousands of value and stronger network. As Bitcoin ages, it inevitably changes in character compared to its early, idealistic day. The censorship, regulatory dependent, privacy, even price is heavily influenced by just one person, or institutional investors as well as unrelated events. So yes, it's lossing its characters and everyone knows it, especially the OGs.

Is there a change in Bitcoin's character? There's probably none. Perhaps the change is in its perception and treatment. But has Bitcoin per se changed? It hasn't, right? Bitcoin remains the decentralized system that it always has been. If at all, it has grown stronger. It remains the immutable, transparent, borderless, trustless, censorship-resistant, seizure-resistant money. Has it gone astray from those designs? I don't think so.

Bitcoin being highly treated as an investment today doesn't necessarily mean Bitcoin itself has changed.

[EarnOnVictor]

Quote : ...when you cannot beat the system, you join the system...

You would have done better if you had clarified things on purpose.

Well, as I suspected, I believe you meant the way Bitcoin has been tried to be weakened with centralised systems and regulation? It's indeed alarming, and I will always say that in many spheres now, Bitcoin is highly indirectly decentralised. Bitcoin will always have the decentralised structure, but the privacy and somewhat anonymity it was designed for are being defeated by centralised arrangements and regulations.

It can only get worse!

[Gozie51]

I only remember that phrase being used in the NBA when Durant couldn’t beat the Warriors, so he joined them and ended up winning a championship with them.

I like this but we can't say the same for Mbappe who joined Madrid in search of Champions League Trophy but ended up losing it, oh... he would have stayed back in PSG if his soothsayer saw the outcome of his joining Madrid  

Back to the point. Like in your idea too, bitcoin has not moved anywhere from what it was made for and this is evident in its dominant of the crypto space. A rise in the price of bitcoin increases the prices of altcoins and likewise when bitcoin goes red.

Nothing has been altered in bitcoin itself, it is the government who is joining and forcing itself to have a stake in the operation by making concerted effort to regulate the decentralised system through third party control. If we are talking about change, before now there are CEX who don't go after KYC but that has changed. The government never levied tax on bitcoin transaction but that has changed. The changes are not with bitcoin but the adoption level is what is increasing and the government is coming in for their gains. So we can expect difference in operation not changes in what bitcoin characteristics is for like limited supply, privacy, cryptographic security, divisibility, deflationary etc have not changed.

[Alpha Marine]

Bitcoin will only lose its identity when it becomes centralised and has an unlimited supply. As long as Bitcoin has not fallen that far, it has not lost its identity. The way people use Bitcoin does not define it because it was already defined long before people started using it.
If people decide to use it in a centralised exchange, it only defeats one of the purposes of Bitcoin, but that does not mean it has lost its identity. In the same way, if people use it as an asset instead of a currency, it doesn't mean bitcoin is losing its identity because bitcoin can be a speculative asset and a currency.

[Trout Mask]

I truly feel BTC transcends just about every issue humans can come up with.

[purple_sparkles]

Bitcoin will only lose its identity when it becomes centralised and has an unlimited supply. As long as Bitcoin has not fallen that far, it has not lost its identity. The way people use Bitcoin does not define it because it was already defined long before people started using it.
If people decide to use it in a centralised exchange, it only defeats one of the purposes of Bitcoin, but that does not mean it has lost its identity. In the same way, if people use it as an asset instead of a currency, it doesn't mean bitcoin is losing its identity because bitcoin can be a speculative asset and a currency.

I think that the more popularity Bitcoin gains among world governments, the less noticeable its cycles of growth and decline will become. Its rising popularity among everyday users as a means of payment or investment doesn't necessarily define its identity. But if governments start to seriously regulate it, that could significantly affect its identity and original principles.

[Kagaru]

I think that the more popularity Bitcoin gains among world governments, the less noticeable its cycles of growth and decline will become. Its rising popularity among everyday users as a means of payment or investment doesn't necessarily define its identity. But if governments start to seriously regulate it, that could significantly affect its identity and original principles.

I agree with that . Characteristic Bitcoin features that are deeply enshrined in the unique identities of the cryptocurrency include decentralisation, fixed supply and censorship resistance. As long as the pillars have not collapsed, then it has not really lost itself. It simply does not change its fabric in the manner in which it is used by people with the change in trends or requirements. Nevertheless, you are correct that should governments begin to implement strict rules or however attempt to encompass it into the same category as fiat regimes, this will suffice to diminish what is so special about Bitcoin. It is not a question of how the people use it but it is a question of how much control the outside forces can exert upon it.