1

I'm confronted by someone who states that Satoshi Nakamoto never compared Bitcoin to gold in the monetary sense (not about mining).

However, I'm sure that I recall a quote from Satoshi stating Bitcoin is digital gold which was used several years ago in the debate of Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash as an argument that Bitcoin is a store of value and not a means of payment.

I'm failing to find it again. The only thing I found is about Bitcoin mining, but this isn't in the meaning I need to prove.

Murch
  • 75,206
  • 34
  • 186
  • 622
user2284570
  • 286
  • 2
  • 14
  • 1
    This elephant is Bitcoin and different users calling it different things: https://i.imgur.com/mKsF28k.png –  Sep 06 '20 at 13:12
  • 2
    There is an allegedly complete collection of Satoshi's public writings at https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/. The github repo has everything in json format which you could search for the word "gold". I got 66 hits which you should be able to go through fairly fast. – Nate Eldredge Sep 06 '20 at 16:44
  • This? – Nat Sep 08 '20 at 07:14
  • @Nat I said in monetary terms so not about mining. – user2284570 Sep 08 '20 at 07:34
  • This would seem to be the next closest thing. Barring that, potentially a misquote? – Nat Sep 08 '20 at 07:41
  • 1
    In pondering what the usefulness of Bitcoin might be, there are many interesting and pertinent considerations, but "What Satoshi intended" isn't really one of them. Perhaps his motivation and intent is of historical interest, but it does not change what Bitcoin is today. And anyways, arguments about 'store of value vs payments' are naïvely mutually exclusive. – chytrik Sep 08 '20 at 22:24
  • @chytrik the problem when you have someone citing is own Bitcoin proponent that Bitcoin was never meant to be scarce (not on purpose). Then tour best bet is to refer Satoshi. – user2284570 Sep 08 '20 at 22:29
  • 1
    Thats not a problem, people are free to have opinions about what Satoshi intended, but such opinions have no affect on what bitcoin is. Someone arguing that it "was never meant to be scarce" can simply be directed to the lines of code that defined the block subsidy in the original codebase. We don't need to read between the lines of Satoshi's writings on that point, scarcity was hard-coded in from day one. Whether that means Satoshi saw BTC as a gold equivalent (or not) doesn't change the reality of it being such a thing (or not). – chytrik Sep 08 '20 at 22:38
  • @chytrik in my case it s used as an argument that the fiat credit system was meant to cohoxist with Bitcoin and thus I shouldn t search borrowing in Bitcoin. In contrast, if Bitcoin scarcity is on purpose then it s a step at demonstrating that Bitcoin is meant to replace fiat as seen by the ecb and many of it s proponents and that having a proper credit system on Bitcoin is a milestone or not. – user2284570 Sep 08 '20 at 22:53
  • @chytrik The argument that Bitcoin is not digital gold has to be defeated for me to receive answers in my search or founding of a service for borrowing in Bitcoin. As I m paid in cryptocurrency, this is the only thing I can borrow safely against my income which is why I care about the answer. – user2284570 Sep 08 '20 at 22:53
  • @chytrik so it s about wiewing scarcity as a requirement for the payment system to work or as an on purpose design decision. – user2284570 Sep 08 '20 at 22:57
  • 1
    @user2284570 I think that the questions you posed in your comment replies are great, but I mean to point out that the answer to them doesn't depend on what Satoshi intended, it instead depends on what the reality of Bitcoin is. And in the debate about what Bitcoin is, opinions about Satoshi's intent are rather inconsequential. – chytrik Sep 08 '20 at 23:49

1 Answers1

3

Where did Staoshi Nakamoto stated that bitcoin is gold or digital gold?

He didn't.

Not in any of his public writings.

an argument that Bitcoin is a store of value and not a meant of payment.

In his original whitepaper, Satoshi Nakamoto was very clear that they saw Bitcoin as a means of payment.

What is needed is an electronic payment system

The whitepaper does not mention the phrase "store of value". Since they were undoubtedly aware of this property of currencies, we must infer it was not of primary importance in the motivation for the design of Bitcoin.

So it would be surprising if there is any evidence available that would conclusively prove that Nakomoto completely changed their mind about this.

See also Breakdown of all Satoshi's Writings Proves Bitcoin not Built Primarily as Store of Value

Did Satoshi build Bitcoin to serve primarily as a store of value, or did he build it for making payments?

To answer this question, I went straight to the source. Thanks to the Satoshi Nakamoto Institute’s archives I was able to read every single thing Satoshi ever posted publicly. Comments from 260 forum threads, 63 emails, and his original source code.

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.

RedGrittyBrick
  • 26,841
  • 3
  • 25
  • 51
  • This was of course in one of his comments. Not the paper. And the question is not about store of value but with the comparison to gold specifically. – user2284570 Sep 06 '20 at 16:38
  • @user2284570: The referenced article looks at the entirety of Nakamoto's public writing. The article includes some quotations where Nakamoto mentions gold. It is clear that nowhere does Nakamoto state that Bitcoin is gold or digital gold. Certainly not in any context that would support the notion that Nakamoto saw Bitcoin as a store of vale and not as a means of payment. – RedGrittyBrick Sep 06 '20 at 16:57
  • Correct. But the quote I found years ago was misplaced since gold was money. That Satoshi designed Bitcoin for payment doesn t means he never compared Bitcoin to gold. I just wan t to tell the other party I m not wrong. – user2284570 Sep 06 '20 at 17:09