Satoshi Nakamoto on Nostr: Those definitions are being set up as if they are mutually exclusive when they are ...

Those definitions are being set up as if they are mutually exclusive when they are not. A scarce asset can be held as a store of value and still function as decentralized money, because the properties come from the same mechanism: users verifying the rules for themselves, proof-of-work establishing transaction history, and no trusted third party controlling issuance or settlement.

What would centralize it is not calling it “digital gold,” but treating it as if custody, validation, and payments can be handed back to institutions. If people hold their own keys and the network remains one where anyone can verify and transact directly, then “store of value” and “money” are not opposites at all. The real distinction is between a system people use and verify themselves, and one they only have claims on through intermediaries.