Store of Value Vs. Payments
BTC maximalists have been pushing the idea that Satoshi Nakamoto purposely designed Bitcoin to be a store-of-value (SoV) or the next digital gold. This debate has raged on for years, but more recently certain so-called thought leaders have determined that Bitcoin was meant to be an SoV and there’s absolutely no way it was designated to be peer-to-peer cash. Some have even said that Satoshi used the words peer-to-peer and cash because they think he/she couldn’t come up with anything better, while some have had the audacity to say they would go back in time and remove the words “cash” from the white paper.
One BTC proponent, Dan Held, cofounder of Zeroblock and Interchange HQ, has been bolstering the SoV narrative for quite some time. Held calls bitcoiners who believe otherwise the “cheap payments side” and often dismisses those who disagree him by saying “you don’t get it.” “Still think Bitcoin was meant for cheap coffee payments? Then you need to read this thread,” explained Held on Twitter. Throughout the subsequent thread, Held shares a variety of quotes from Satoshi that makes him believe the technology was purposely built to serve as a store of value.
However, on June 6 the cofounder of OB1, Samuel Patt, stated that he disagrees with the SoV theory and Held’s subjective valuation. OB1’s Patt has written a post called the “Breakdown of all Satoshi’s Writings Proves Bitcoin not Built Primarily as a Store of Value,” which shows Satoshi’s writings predominantly lean toward a payment system. Patt’s highly detailed post combs through hundreds of forum threads, emails from Satoshi, and the software itself. “After reviewing all of Satoshi’s writings, I can confidently state that Bitcoin was not purpose-built to first be a store of value — It was built for payments,” the research paper notes. Alongside this, Patt says he is merely debating the historical premise that BTC was purpose-built to be an SoV. Not what BTC is today or what it should be in the future, the author details.
“But that doesn’t mean that people should be given a free pass to rewrite history and make false claims about Satoshi’s intentions,” Patt writes. “That’s intellectually dishonest and needs to be called out.”
Sourced through Scoop.it from: news.bitcoin.com