In a recent talk, nostr:npub1s33sw6y2p8kpz2t8avz5feu2n6yvfr6swykrnm2frletd7spnt5qew252p makes the case correctly that we should stop using the term âcustodial,â as this is the language that helps the legacy system define self-custody or their term âunhostedâ to suggest that owing your own property is somehow not normal or acceptable.
He goes on to say that we should simply call anything where we donât hold our own keys an account, the same as a bank. But what should we call a âwalletâ (also an inaccurate word) where we directly own the asset? I still havenât found the best way to say it.
A #bitcoin âwalletâ is also a misnomer, when in reality the closest comparison is a key purse, but few people know what one is
For the idea of the natural state of holding the keys the first thing to come to mind is to say you âholdâ #bitcoin, and call out others hold an IOU. Iâll give some more thought to it 
Agreed, neither works well.
You could say youâownâ or âcontrolâ #bitcoin whereas another person with bitcoin on an exchange like Coinbase does not own or control #bitcoin, but the nuance would be lost on a neutral listener
The dilemma stems from our current state of not being able to differentiate between cash and credit in modern #fiat world. Going back to a pre-#fiat world, the wording used would be âpayable in specieâ or similar specific wording
Bearer wallet. Still not perfect because it uses the word wallet, but it better defines the asset.
Bearer walletânot bad. Not the best as you said but not the worst. Test drive it for a while, see how it goes
Then try en specie for entertaining conversations
Actually, call it like it isâyou have keys. Keys to unlock the coins (transactions) on the blockchain. Time to let the wallet terminology go. Along these lines use keyrings, or time to bring back chatelaine
