Potato potata. I don’t see the difference of the point you’re making from what I am saying. Bitcoin was designed to be a currency that eliminates third parties. You can try to write it in a different English but that’s just what it is. Does the whitepaper say it was designed to make people rich via investment? Apparently no. So, it indeed is potato potata.
Yes, but "currency" is a loaded term. Bitcoin is not a "currency" in the way most people use the term, it's a mechanism for value transfer without government oversight (albeit flawed at this task because chain analysis).
Making people rich by investing in it is something that the blockchain architecture
can support since investment instruments can be pooled by brokers. Being a mainstream
currency is something it
cannot support.
Bitcoin will never be a primary way people pay for things. Yes, it may well be a speculation instrument for a long time or even forever, but calling it a "currency" is a bit... misleading in my opinion.
I don’t know what you mean “loaded term”, but Bitcoin is a currency because currency means money, and Bitcoin is money. Bitcoin may never be used as often as fiat currencies but it is a currency that people use to make and receive payments. What then are we doing? Trade by barter? I can’t believe I am even conversing this because what does the title of Bitcoin white paper say? “
Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” How do you define cash? Okay, in the first 2 lines of the whitepaper, tell me you don’t see “
online payments”. If this doesn’t leave you thinking, I don’t know what will.