Is Crypto About Financial Freedom,Crypto, or Just Another Investment Asset Now?

[Glowy]

Crypto was originally built around the idea of financial freedom, self-custody, permission-less access, and independence from traditional systems.

But today, a large part of the conversation seems to revolve around price, ETFs, institutions, and returns.

Many users are entering the space not for freedom, but for investment opportunities.

So here’s what I’m thinking, crypto shifted from a movement to just another asset class, or is the original purpose still intact beneath the surface?

[Odusko]

To those that holds decentralized coins like Bitcoin, if you don't move your Bitcoin off your own wallet into third party wallet like exchange or other platforms, you still holds your power, freedom and permissionless to spent your Bitcoin, attention is shifting because of demand for high value for the market, ETFs are meant to control the market but only those that buy into it will have their freedom and control transfered but what they are focusing on is the increase value of their assets and no longer about privacy or decentralization.

[legiteum]

It's just another asset class: Bitcoin is a meme investment instrument whose value depends entirely on more people buying it after you do in order for it to go up in value.

Almost all trading of Bitcoin today is done using apps, brokers, ETFs or options, which means people don't even use any of Bitcoin's features: they are just buying a representation of Bitcoin, not Bitcoin itself, and consumers are fine with this because they just want to profit from an investment and they don't care what it actually is.

If you want to evade governments, Bitcoin doesn't work as well as products like Monero, which hides your identity.

If you want to transfer money, like cross-border trading or anonymous payments, fast stablecoins are better in every imaginable way, which is why hardly anybody uses Bitcoin for that today.

[X-ray]

Nothing wrong with being both, you got freedom if you plan to buy bitcoin and keep it in your own wallet. If you want investment exposure on the other hand without the need to understand the technology, feel free to buy the ETF.

Everybody can buy and keep bitcoin as they want whether through custodial service or not it is up to you. Isn't it the best kind of financial freedom there is?

Some may want to stick with one ideal but I'm fine with current bitcoin as it is.

[noorman0]

I think you need to specifically mention crypto, like Bitcoin. Not all cryptocurrencies promise users freedom of use. Even in their early days, some were legally regulated.

Regarding financial freedom, it should be achieved individually by any means necessary. Bitcoin doesn't offer this in its whitepaper. While governments can't directly prevent you from transacting or limit your holdings, they can draft laws that threaten you or simply burden you with taxes.

[m2017]

Crypto was originally built around the idea of financial freedom, self-custody, permission-less access, and independence from traditional systems.

And now the BTC-community awaits regulatory approval and integration into the traditional financial system, yet they're ready to "surrender" to KYCs, allowing themselves to be subjected to the "financial control collar". How much have values ​​changed in less than 20 years, right?

But today, a large part of the conversation seems to revolve around price, ETFs, institutions, and returns.

Has greed destroyed ideals?

Many users are entering the space not for freedom, but for investment opportunities.

In fact, no one and nothing prevents you from using bitcoin for its original purposes, because everyone is given the freedom of choice: "greed" or "freedom".

So here’s what I’m thinking, crypto shifted from a movement to just another asset class, or is the original purpose still intact beneath the surface?

Yes, bitcoin has been transformed en masse into a somewhat different financial asset than originally intended. However, the original features remain intact (no one has removed them), allowing those seeking financial freedom to use these same features to their advantage.

[cryptoaddictchie]

So here’s what I’m thinking, crypto shifted from a movement to just another asset class, or is the original purpose still intact beneath the surface?

Probably a wide spread adoption is happening. Yes crypto or bitcoin should be used for decentralized purpose as Satoshi intended too but things differ since then as more users keeps knowing it and joining the space, expect some changes with it as some of these people are still doubt with it decentralized approach chooses to have a platform or firm to handle those things for them. Like the etf. We cant deny that their look on those crypto now is like an investment but its fine there are still users who has different point of view with these cryptocurrency.

[arzuo]

In fact, a large portion of those who are getting involved in crypto solely for investment purposes want to make a quick profit, which often leaves them up to their luck.
The real purpose of crypto is to be independent, unregulated, and private, which sets the standard for wealth preservation!

[Taskford]

Crypto was originally built around the idea of financial freedom, self-custody, permission-less access, and independence from traditional systems.

But today, a large part of the conversation seems to revolve around price, ETFs, institutions, and returns.

Many users are entering the space not for freedom, but for investment opportunities.

So here’s what I’m thinking, crypto shifted from a movement to just another asset class, or is the original purpose still intact beneath the surface?

Depends on how you personally take it. People have different purpose on why they are using Bitcoin, so expect to receive different opinions about this question you are asking.

But perspective change depends on the current trend that's why its better not to focus on how people use or treat Bitcoin. What's important is you are seeing a growing trend of people using Bitcoin, because this is important situation which important need to look at.

[SilverCryptoBullet]

Crypto was originally built around the idea of financial freedom, self-custody, permission-less access, and independence from traditional systems.

But today, a large part of the conversation seems to revolve around price, ETFs, institutions, and returns.

Many users are entering the space not for freedom, but for investment opportunities.

So here’s what I’m thinking, crypto shifted from a movement to just another asset class, or is the original purpose still intact beneath the surface?

I see Bitcoin like it is, and other things like ETFs are derivatives stuffs from Wall Street that try to participate in Bitcoin market.

You only need to focus on yourself, your job, income, financial status, and your investment strategy and practice. If you can do your accumulation well, and can hold your bitcoin a long time, Bitcoin will help you richer. Companies from Wall Street will contribute to Bitcoin adoption and market growth while you don't need to buy any products of those companies, you can still take advantage of their contributions on Bitcoin adoption growth and market growth for your own portfolio growth.

They can do market manipulations but if you only focus on investing and holding, your portfolio won't be liquidated like traders and you will be not only save but profitable in long term.

[betswift]

You decide what you do with your crypto and how you do it.

Institutions just entered the stage too.

[Darker45]

If you want to transfer money, like cross-border trading or anonymous payments, fast stablecoins are better in every imaginable way, which is why hardly anybody uses Bitcoin for that today.

How are stablecoins better than Bitcoin in every imaginable way? Or you're referring to a specific stablecoin? If you're referring to stablecoins in general especially the most popular ones, don't you think they're worse than Bitcoin in the sense that they're an antithesis to freedom?
Also, how are stablecoins anonymous? Aren't they centralized, too? Don't stablecoin companies have absolute control over the funds of all their users? I wonder how they're better than Bitcoin in this case.

[FortuneFollower]

If you want to transfer money, like cross-border trading or anonymous payments, fast stablecoins are better in every imaginable way, which is why hardly anybody uses Bitcoin for that today.

How are stablecoins better than Bitcoin in every imaginable way? Or you're referring to a specific stablecoin? If you're referring to stablecoins in general especially the most popular ones, don't you think they're worse than Bitcoin in the sense that they're an antithesis to freedom?
Also, how are stablecoins anonymous? Aren't they centralized, too? Don't stablecoin companies have absolute control over the funds of all their users? I wonder how they're better than Bitcoin in this case.

i think legitium views it from the practical standpoint. not from the anonymous point both can be used, but it depends on the amount you want to send, the congestion of the network, and so on, whereas with stables.. there is less intricasy to it. i would love to read you two discussing it

[KiaKia]

Crypto was originally built around the idea of financial freedom, self-custody, permission-less access, and independence from traditional systems.

But today, a large part of the conversation seems to revolve around price, ETFs, institutions, and returns.

Many users are entering the space not for freedom, but for investment opportunities.

So here’s what I’m thinking, crypto shifted from a movement to just another asset class, or is the original purpose still intact beneath the surface?

Nothing has really changed if you look it very well, how will financial freedom work if returns aren't included? You said Bitcoin was built around the idea of financial freedom right?

Are you trying to say that institutions should be left out when all they are about is making huge returns? Since Bitcoin is built around the idea of financial freedom all these was expected.

In case you don't know, apart from the fact that many people are here to make money, some of us are holding Bitcoin because this is the only way to truly own something.

If Bitcoin can't bring me financial freedom but true control and ownership, this is enough for me to keep my money in Bitcoin.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Crypto was originally built around the idea of financial freedom, self-custody, permission-less access, and independence from traditional systems.

But today, a large part of the conversation seems to revolve around price, ETFs, institutions, and returns.

Many users are entering the space not for freedom, but for investment opportunities.

So here’s what I’m thinking, crypto shifted from a movement to just another asset class, or is the original purpose still intact beneath the surface?

If you are talking about bitcoin in particular, I would say that the original purpose is still intact for real and not beneath the surface, just that now, you also have the option of going full self custody or allowing the government and institutions manage your money for you..

For example, when I choose to buy the real bitcoin directly from exchanges and withdraw the bitcoins to my private wallet which only me have access to, that's the original purpose of bitcoin, when I choose to turn fiat into bitcoin and hold in my private wallet instead of saving the fiat in my bank account, that the original purpose of bitcoin.
If I walk into a store that accepts bitcoin payments and buys few things and choose to pay using bitcoin, that the original purpose of bitcoin and so many more.

But then on the other hand, any body can choose to buy or invest in the ETF version is bitcoin which I term as the government owned version of bitcoin, the government monitors this fund even while it's held by the ETF company, this is another option anybody can choose as well..

[Oasisman]

Do you think it has changed? I mean, Bitcoin's utilities didn't changed, right? So, the idea of financial freedom is still there, and you still can take advantage of those perks of having freedom to your finances. While at the same time, Bitcoin starting to behave like an asset when institutions, ETFs, and big whales entered.
A lot of people now have been attracted with how Bitcoin incentives those who are holding it, so, this is like the narrative now. But then again, the original idea of Bitcoin didn't changed nor lost. Some new investors didn't really realize how Bitcoin gives us financially freedom until they need it, as they are too focused on treating Bitcoin solely as an asset.

[Nathrixxx]

Bitcoin in cryptocurrency as unleashed a lot of opportunity for us or to have when it's comes to the financial economy, both the financial freedom opportunity and an investment asset opportunity to maximize our profitability are all enjoying in Bitcoin adoption, to unveil all these opportunities in diverse realms for us, we only need to know how we can join in adoption and also learn more about how relevant it applications are for our daily engagement, because we need to be more knowledgeable about bitcoin before we can be profitable in it strategically.

[legiteum]

If you want to transfer money, like cross-border trading or anonymous payments, fast stablecoins are better in every imaginable way, which is why hardly anybody uses Bitcoin for that today.

How are stablecoins better than Bitcoin in every imaginable way? Or you're referring to a specific stablecoin? If you're referring to stablecoins in general especially the most popular ones, don't you think they're worse than Bitcoin in the sense that they're an antithesis to freedom?

It depends on what you mean by "freedom". If you mean a product that will allow you to transfer value without your government being able to find out, Bitcoin is terrible for that since there's a public ledger and your transactions can be triangulated with chain analysis.

Otherwise, most probably have a much faster settlement time and cost a lot less per transaction, so that sounds more "free" to me (and some settle in literal milliseconds and have zero tx fees).

Also, how are stablecoins anonymous? Aren't they centralized, too? Don't stablecoin companies have absolute control over the funds of all their users? I wonder how they're better than Bitcoin in this case.

It depends on the stablecoin. Many have the same problem Bitcoin has with its public ledger, but some (and I won't self-promote here) are completely private unless they are hit with a specific, validated government inquiry, similar to how other privacy products work like VPNs. Unless you are doing something illegal (and the cops are on to you), this is the level of anonymity and privacy that most want.

Finally, stablecoins are, well, stable. Bitcoin and other floating cryptos aren't for transfers, they are for investing / speculating. You buy Bitcoin because you want to sell it for more later. There's nothing wrong with that, but if you are trying to run a business and get paid, that's not what you want because you can't do any planning on that.

i think legitium views it from the practical standpoint. not from the anonymous point both can be used, but it depends on the amount you want to send, the congestion of the network, and so on, whereas with stables.. there is less intricasy to it. i would love to read you two discussing it

I also view it from the privacy standpoint. Bitcoin is not private. It's actually the opposite of private. There are some stablecoins that work just like Bitcoin in that way, but others keep their ledger a secret and can only be exposed by a specifically targeted and legally valid inquiry by the government. That keeps you completely private and anonymous from absolutely everybody in the world unless you are being targeted by your government (at which point no technology is going to help you, let's be real here).