> I'm not trying to say there are no other uses for whatever bitcoin is, but that some people valued bitcoin only/first for being money -- and, in the case of the early adopters, that this is a reasonable claim.

It is a reasonable claim and I agree with it.

> money existed before gold.

Of course it did. I don't think that is absurd at all.

I love the title btw.

I tell my friends that seem to think money is evil that its a technology. But I like language too. Not sure I can explain it well though. Not before they doze off. Money is a tool (technology) to make exchange easier and more functional.

kepford

One could argue that these are needed for digital money but not ONLY digital money.

Good point. I'm not trying to say there are no other uses for whatever bitcoin is, but that some people valued bitcoin only/first for being money -- and, in the case of the early adopters, that this is a reasonable claim.

How long did it take for gold to become a money? Was it always a money or was this discovered?

I believe my position (although I don't think I fully expressed this) is that money existed before gold. That's an absurd statement, so perhaps I should rephrase it: money is something that humans developed independent of things like gold, they just anchored it to gold or shells or whatever because it provided scarcity.

I think this could be extended to say that gold coins or shells or nails are stablewords?

If money is a language, a way of communicating and "incorporate inchoate knowledge that we can't even articulate to ourselves" (

), the way we peg them to reality is through some sort of scarcity. We need to pin our words down so they can't be thrown around without connection to reality. We have to make them into stablewords. This used to e mostly via physical objects. But Bitcoin changed the game.

(A title using stablewords would have been good, but I couldn't figure out a nice turn of phrase)

bitcoin

econ

Money is a language

Scoresby

> One could argue that these are needed for digital money but not ONLY digital money.

Good point. I'm not trying to say there are no other uses for whatever bitcoin is, but that some people valued bitcoin only/first for being money -- and, in the case of the early adopters, that this is a reasonable claim.  

> How long did it take for gold to become a money? Was it always a money or was this discovered?

I believe my position (although I don't think I fully expressed this) is that money existed before gold. That's an absurd statement, so perhaps I should rephrase it: money is something that humans developed independent of things like gold, they just anchored it to gold or shells or whatever because it provided scarcity. 

I think this could be extended to say that gold coins or shells or nails are stablewords?

If money is a language, a way of communicating and "incorporate inchoate knowledge that we can't even articulate to ourselves" (https://stacker.news/items/1426207/r/Scoresby?commentId=1426333), the way we peg them to reality is through some sort of scarcity. We need to pin our words down so they can't be thrown around without connection to reality. We have to make them into stablewords. This used to e mostly via physical objects. But Bitcoin changed the game.

(A title using stablewords would have been good, but I couldn't figure out a nice turn of phrase)