I was using Bitcoin as money back in like 2011 or 2012 buying things online.
It was never an asset to invest in, just like cash isn't an asset.
Investing in Bitcoin is called savings.
Are you suggesting that people should be able to use USDT on nostr?
Because monereo litecoin and doge have such a small number of users and I've never heard of any other crypto actually being used as money.
I think regular credit or debit card payments for services would help reach, as would a nip that allows users to specify what crypto they will accept. Let the free market decide what's better.
The decision to be Bitcoin only is a principled decision, but like overlapping venn diagrams it selects for a smaller subset of users.
Some of the big apps require kyc to use zaps, so defeat the point of permissionless money. They could be good fiat to Bitcoin onramps.
We set up to be Bitcoin only, but all the people we reached out to IRL ignored that and payed cash or didn't come back.
Lately, I’ve been warming up to the idea of stablecoins, mainly USDT implemented over Lightning. I know this can be a fairly controversial topic, but it doesn’t have to be. Bitcoin is a monetary network, but in order for it to reach the most people possible, it has to serve them where they are right now, not where we want them to be in a future world where everything is priced in magic internet money. It’s simply too many leaps to ask them to take all at once.
USDT would be the lowest priority in my opinion. It has all the drawbacks of crypto without the benefits of sovereignty or scarcity. I'd sooner incorporate Bitcoin Cash.
That’s short-sighted, IMHO. BCash doesn’t solve a single problem for anyone. USDT solves access to a dollar denomination, something real people actually want all over the world, but with the security of bitcoin and the speed of Lightning.
This essay made it make sense for me.
nostr:naddr1qqxnzde5xs6rjv3kxcer2vp3qyt8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnswf5k6ctv9ehx2aqzyzpxa8uftwq6ksdy2g3x3vjfu6xs9j5pvzx77432fy7wud0lchr4jqcyqqq823cvxfpm0
If you need to reach your #40HPW🎧 quota this week, there’s also a podcast here:
I get the appeal, it's good for NGU, more money to buy Bitcoin pushing up prices.
Stablecoins like USDT also give people access to dollars they can't easily get, and running them over Lightning adds speed and accessibility. But it's not something we are willing to promote. Stablecoins don't fix the system, they reinforce it.
They don't inherit Bitcoin's security. USDT is a custodial IOU, not a bearer asset. If the issuer is compromised or pressured, users can be rugged. There's no self-custody and no guarantee.
Worse, stablecoins preserve and even intensify the fiat system’s structural flaws. They keep the Cantillon effect alive, benefiting those closest to issuance, while ordinary people suffer dilution. Instead of ending financial injustice, stablecoins put it on faster rails.
And we can’t ignore the Triffin dilemma. Stablecoins drive global demand for USD denominated assets. That forces issuers to scale their reserves by acquiring US Treasuries or Bitcoin. This mirrors the same unsustainable dynamic that collapsed the gold standard, global demand backed by finite reserves. A future redemption crisis could lead to frozen convertibility and systemic loss, just like 1971. Only this time, it's Bitcoin that risks being confiscated or over leveraged.
Bitcoin wasn’t created to upgrade fiat, it was created to end the theft at its core.
Supporting stablecoins means participating in what Austrian economists, Bitcoiners, and sound money advocates have always opposed: a system that steals from the poor and gives to the rich.
If we don’t offer a bridge, people won’t just swim across.
