Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Bitcoin is Art
by
serjent05
on 14/12/2022, 19:52:48 UTC
It is one thing to say or use an analogy to express ideas associated with a concept, a fact, etc. and another very different thing is to assume that such a thing is so or to convert the comparative or the analogy into equality.

Art mainly uses tangible elements, as a form of expression to recreate feelings, emotions or what each person may well feel when seeing or observing a creation that has such an end.
Among the categories of art that exist, it does not fit into any, it is an invention and the inventions that have been developed throughout humanity have served to create art or enjoy, the music, for example, the phonograph continues to be a great invention.

If we consider anime movies as art and digital paintings and digital characters as art, then why shouldn't we say Bitcoin as virtual currency as art?  The one I cited examples is non-tangible because they are digital entities but then many accept them as art because it conveys the feeling or emotion of the creator or conveys the definition of art in it.  Isn't Bitcoin created in the same manner?  So what makes it an exemption in this case?


Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer electronic currency, just like Satoshi said. When people start calling it something else, like "a swarm of digital hornets", "digital gold", "art", "revolution" and so on, it suggests that it isn't doing well as currency, because otherwise people wouldn't need to create new narratives of what Bitcoin is.
When a small percentage of people use strange and unrelated definitions to describe Bitcoin, it shows their mentality not what Bitcoin really is or how it's performing. For example from early days there has been some people who call bitcoin a "Ponzi scheme" but that is not a comment on Bitcoin but on their understanding of Bitcoin (or rather lack of understanding).

And also possible that they have more understanding of Bitcoin than the normal Bitcoin enthusiast does.  Wink