I resonate with this. But at the same time we also said "bitcoin is for enemies" back in the day. Who are we to say people cannot use a superset of Bitcoin in a permissioned way? And if it cannot survive what these people are doing, then wasn't it doomed from day one to begin with?
Honest questions.
There’s a difference between using and controlling the narrative about what Bitcoin is and how it should be used
But at this moment bitcoin's most compelling use for many is as a primary store of value or a hedge against uncertainty (which arguably is at a peak currently).
People who live in countries with relatively stable currencies (an illusion possibly fading as we chat) do not yet see the value in using bitcoin transactionally. But those in countries that have weak currencies ARE using it that way now.
But people have to HAVE bitcoin before they can spend it.
My biggest discomfort around all this is the concentration of bitcoin in the hands of custodians and of course then possible rehypothication.
But I also believe that will end very badly for those who try it as it always has.
But is the first rain users stack bitcoin is for the "digital gold " use case I think that is both a very legitimate use will as a good introduction for people to realize what it is beyond that.
(Bitcoinner since 2011. (Monero since 2014 :) ))
