The discussion surrounding Bitcoin’s function as a payment method versus its role as a store of value continues. With prices consistently exceeding $100k and increasing pressure from ETF issuers and Bitcoin treasury firms, as well as the inevitable institutionalization of the market, the notion of using Bitcoin for minor transactions feels increasingly antiquated.
But is Jack Dorsey correct in claiming that Bitcoin loses its purpose if it remains solely a store of value and isn’t utilized for payments?
Bitcoin as a Payment Method
Initially, Bitcoin was designed as a payment tool, serving as a genuine form of electronic cash for private, peer-to-peer exchanges, while its status as a store of value developed later as an ancillary advantage. As BitVM creator Robin Linus notes:
“Bitcoin’s purpose is payments—store of value is just a neat byproduct.”
Over the years, the narrative around Bitcoin has shifted significantly towards its “digital gold” image and institutional investment. Influential figures like Dorsey and Linus argue that this shift neglects the project’s initial spirit and diminishes its long-term importance. Linus emphasized the historical context by stating:
“The cypherpunk vision was clearly electronic cash for private, peer-to-peer payments. The ‘digital asset’ narrative came later from others. Strange that this is even controversial.”
Dorsey reaffirmed his stance, stating:
“I think it has to be payments for it to be relevant on the everyday; otherwise, it’s just something you kind of buy and forget and only use in emergency situations or when you want to get liquid again. So I think if it doesn’t transition to payments and find that everyday use case, it just gets increasingly irrelevant. And that’s failure to me.”
Satoshi’s Intent is Clear
Satoshi Nakamoto’s earliest communications, including emails and the well-known Bitcoin whitepaper, clearly indicate that Bitcoin is aimed at functioning as e-cash, currency, or money focused on payments. His intentions regarding Bitcoin as a payment method are explicit.
In early emails with Adam Back in 2008, Satoshi referred to Bitcoin as a revolutionary method for establishing peer-to-peer electronic currency, highlighting previous digital cash efforts while concentrating on payments.
He articulated proof-of-work as a mechanism to facilitate currency on a distributed timestamp server, emphasizing payment intent distinctly.
Shifting Narratives: From Currency to Asset
Over time, the narrative has evolved. The advent of institutionalization through ETFs, marketing focused on “Number Go Up” (NGU), and discussions regarding Bitcoin as a portfolio hedge have emerged.
While these developments have contributed to liquidity and wider acceptance, they have arguably distanced the ecosystem from solutions that serve everyday individuals and practical payment scenarios—moving away from Satoshi’s original vision.
Despite Bitcoin’s notable ascent as a store of value, this has overshadowed its fundamental basis in private, peer-to-peer, digital payments.
Key advocates for the project—Dorsey, Linus, Swan, and even Satoshi—remind the community that true, universal utility hinges on recognizing Bitcoin as an active form of money, not merely a stored asset.
Bitcoin Audible host Guy Swann called for a meaningful public discussion, tagging influential Bitcoin community members like Dorsey, Linus, Michael Saylor, Saifedean Ammous, and Adam Back:
“I want the best here who will bring real arguments. Not just taglines, moral posturing, and quotes from the whitepaper.”
Reducing Bitcoin to just a store of value risks losing the original vision and practicality that once set it apart. The future of Bitcoin as a payment method relies on a community willing to challenge dominant narratives and refocus on payments and real-world usage.
