1/ Satoshi’s Vision™ is a silly endeavor, as it doesn’t matter what it was, we are where we are now. However, those pushing the “Bitcoin was first made for payments” narrative insist on cherry-picking sentences from the white paper and forum posts to champion their perspective.
“[with Bitcoin] we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years.” — Satoshi Nakamoto
“Bitcoin [is] more like a collectible or commodity.” - Satoshi
Satoshi here clearly highlights that Bitcoin’s scarcity gives it value… as a SoV. Limited supply is meaningless for VISA
Bitcoin’s launch during the 08' financial crisis was not coincidental. Satoshi had been coding Bitcoin for the last 2 years. Let’s look at the sequence of events
Sept 15: Lehman Brothers files for bankruptcy, the largest in U.S. history ($600B)
Sept 17: Investors withdrew a record $144B from their money market accounts. During a typical week, only about $7B is withdrawn
Oct 13: Treasury Secretary Paulson talks with 9 major bank CEOs. The total bailout package ~$2.25T
Oct 21: Fed lends $540B to bail out money market funds
Oct 31: Satoshi publishes the Bitcoin whitepaper
https://t.co/Bf8X1VI7Qo
“A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic [bearer assets] that would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution."
@pierre_rochard
Aka the whitepaper was marketing, the important details are coming.
“The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks”
What he was trying to accomplish was clear, he wanted to build a new backbone for the financial system. Bitcoin isn't merely digital cash, but an alternative to banks.
SoV and MoE aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s about where in the cycle of appreciation we’re in. At maturity, the payment use case finally makes sense.

https://t.co/C6kpf8cjKX

A/ Satoshi used it to attract the cypherpunks
B/ HODLing isn’t good for business. In order to command higher valuations, startups latched onto narratives that VCs would fund. And in 2013-2016 that was “merchant processing.”
and @ChangeTip, both attempted to get people to use Bitcoin for payments. Consumers couldn't care less, which is entirely intuitive: right now it’s not faster, cheaper, or easier to use for 99.99% of use cases.
https://t.co/TYJDEruzvc
More from Dan Held
Over the last year and a half, I’ve earned ~1.2BTC with various yield generating services to earn an average of 5% on 30 BTC.
Here’s my journey and how to guide👇
2/ Here are the ways you can earn yield:
Lending (Easiest/most popular)
Yield: 3-6%
- Ledn: https://t.co/4x0YATuQ0v
- BlockFi: https://t.co/90Xtg2cNka
Covered calls (Harder)
Yield: 1-80%
- Deribit: https://t.co/2iQVkXlylP
- LedgerX:
3/ Earning a yield enables you to stack more sats (what I’m doing), or reduce the temptation to sell your coin through earning an income.
The yield you earn comes with RISK!
Below is my current allocation for Dec (will update MoM)
(yellow = changes)
https://t.co/PZwVYs8lFT

4a/ [Nov > Dec Changelog]
- Covered calls: approx. 4 BTC was in $40k 12/28/20 contracts. Those closed without them being exercised (a good outcome for me). However, I was nervous about my January 1/28 $50k contract so I decided to close out my position at a small loss.
4b/ [Nov > Dec Changelog]
- In process of reallocating the 5 BTC (probably will be a lending platform).
- I incorrectly had my Ledn rate at 6.5%, it's 6.25%
More from Bitcoin
1. China PlusToken FUD: Old news. Please see linked thread.
2. U.S. Treasury FUD: Read thread below...
$BTC:
— David Puell (@kenoshaking) November 27, 2020
1/ So here's the deal with all the PlusToken news we've been seeing recently in the crypto media. Thing is, tho it's just being reported now after the Chinese government put out official balances, @ErgoBTC blew this story open for the on-chain community over a year ago... https://t.co/epNjZaNcJ1
1/ These news are much more relevant, as they imply severe trade-offs for people who want to keep their bitcoins undoxxed, with the cost and risks of doing so. I would not disqualify the tweet as mere FUD in the sense that what he posted is false. It should be taken seriously.
2/ For all we know, his decision of making it public before TG weekend may come out of the urgency of informing CT of a poignant anti-Bitcoin move by a Trump administration trying to cut lose ends before leaving office—not just "price manipulation" as I've seen suggested around.
3/ It implies the acceleration of a process already planned for for months in advance, not something he just came up with to "crash the market."
4/ In practicality, assuming this passes, it will have two major consencuences:
a. Armstrong's analysis is correct. And I would go further in saying, this regulation would leave the U.S. severely handicapped to continue to be the leader in the cryptocurrency industry worldwide.
We were offered a very open insight (but slightly flawed analysis) into top level policy perspective behind the crack down on selfhosted wallets.
https://t.co/1LTzrxHbgs 1/32
ECB President Christine Lagarde called for global regulation of #Bitcoin, saying the digital currency had been used for money laundering activities in some instances and that any loopholes needed to be closed. Follow #ReutersNext updates here: https://t.co/4MgFy4jnw5 pic.twitter.com/qlBtoDuZLW
— Reuters (@Reuters) January 13, 2021
'It is a speculative asset, by any account. If you look at the price movements... '
It starts with an economic price perspective and we can learn that ECB is closely monitoring this price movement as one of the many indicators.
So we are in the classic central bank frame 2/32
'Those who thought it would turn into a currency. Sorry, it is an asset not a currency.'
Here she summarises a classic debate on what is currency and what is needed for that. Based on the holy three: unit of account, means of payment, store of value. 3/32
The summary is classic, but too narrow and does not incorporate the wider financial history viewpoints on money, currencies and the way we pay. 4/32
ECB overlooks the de facto unit of account role of bitcoin, having been used to 200 years of having cash around whic is both the unit of account and a means of payment. 5/32
Exceptional listen on #Bitcoin.
— Joseph Skewes (@josephskewes) January 26, 2021
In particular Nic's responses to Mike's aggressive anti-BTC stance.
One dispute with Nic: Even if crypto mail list was best place to announce BTC, if Satoshi wanted fair distribution, surely creating 50% of the supply by Nov 2012 was too fast? https://t.co/e1Hpx4wWOu
#Bitcoin transaction is never really final, given the energy required to keep the network running, and obviously its scale issues will only grow over time. That said, I actually though @nic__carter "won" the debate as it were, and I was unconvinced by the threat to national 2/n
security or undermining Fed policy angles Mike put forward. Two areas that are super interesting to me. One is the issue of #Bitcoin ownership, and how concentrated it is in terms of a small % of addresses that own most of it (2% addresses > 95% of holdings I think). 3/n
made great point a lot of this is omnibus/exchange related - so exchange or fund - ie @Grayscale holds #bitcoin for multiple investors. That may well be true - but it brings up 2 other issues. One - it proves that #bitcoin doesn't really "work" without 4/n
centralisation - as this implies most people need exchanges or funds (or @Paypal) to buy it. If so, that kills off a major "bitcoin is better than gold argument" - as in reality, gold is way more decentralised (from mine supply to ownership distribution). It also brings up a 5/n