Is the market treating Bitcoin as an asset a way for corporations to try and invalidate it as a money in the minds of nocoiners?

It’s money, and markets exist for currency, gold and other goods, as well as other metals used as currency in the past. It turns out that Bitcoin, unlike gold, has value in its global exchange system—permissionless and direct between individuals—it’s not like gold, which is also traded for its other marginal uses. What I mean is that Bitcoin is purely what was described in the white paper: an electronic cash system. So why trade it on the stock market if not to lump it in with everything else and mess with the heads of fiat believers?

I see this confusion in conversations I’ve had with nocoiners, and the point is always the same: that state currencies “have value because people believe they do.” No, I tell them, it’s not quite like that. Fiat has value based on belief because they force you to believe in that Monopoly money; everything around you is flooded with it, with debt instruments created in the jurisdiction where you are. Bitcoin is an electronic money system and a solid system independent of sudden human whims; game theory keeps those whims aligned with what the protocol is intended to be.

And it’s this very market that draws in the curious and the greedy into the Bitcoin ethos, teaching them that it’s more than just an asset. It would be better if, over these 17 years, its use as monet had outshone its sale as an asset. It’s a slow and steady process, and I hope it stays that way for every individual and every merchant who accepts it and helps build a circular economy.

Bitcoin as money, not as a stock market asset.

https://stacker.news/items/1460519