A steelman argument is the opposite of a strawman argument. It's where you imagine the best possible argument from your opposing side (sometimes even better than they themselves can articulate it), and address that. In other words, you treat your critics like absolutely serious people and try to address any concerns they may have with regards to your outlook.

If someone were to argue that, "yeah bitcoin is cool, but ultimately when push comes to shove the major governments are going to outlaw it, drive it into the black market as a small asset, and issue a replacement that they back as legal tender", what would your steelman argument be?

Similarly, if someone were to argue, "Look how fast they are advancing on superconductors. Quantum computing may come sooner than we think, and threaten Bitcoin's security. That's why I don't buy bitcoins", what would your steelman argument be?