Can I ask what the point of arguing semantics here is?
Maybe you have put in the effort to figure out all the avenues to use bitcoin to pay for things, but its not easy and you sound more like a drug addict scrounging for metal and bottles, and then wondering why noone else is interested in your hustle.
Why do you care if people call bitcoin real or not anyways? For most people its not real, for you I guess it is, does that make sense?
tally sticks denoted debt in Britain, and were used directly as money out of convenience, but they were themselves denoted in roman currency iirc.
Can I ask what the point of arguing semantics here is?
Maybe you have put in the effort to figure out all the avenues to use bitcoin to pay for things, but its not easy and you sound more like a drug addict scrounging for metal and bottles, and then wondering why noone else is interested in your hustle.
Why do you care if people call bitcoin real or not anyways? For most people its not real, for you I guess it is, does that make sense?
if someone is making a semantic argument it’s those who won’t accept that Bitcoin is money as surely as any other form of money we have ever used.
What’s the difference between something having monetary value and it being currency then?
I dont see the difference between the bitcoin I could buy drugs with online, and the ps2 I trade my weed dealer 15 years ago for drugs.
I dont understand what greater point there is to be had here besides, “well technically anything is currency”.
there probably is no such thing as fake money except counterfeit money.