a source familiar with the matter on Nostr: You are using language in a loose, metaphorical way while insisting that accurate ...
You are using language in a loose, metaphorical way while insisting that accurate language is a "semantic game".
Bitcoin does not exist. There are no Bitcoins. That is literally and indisputably true.
What does exist is human beings and computer equipment.
So to speak in a strictly factual way, you should not even claim that Bitcoin is money. You should say that INSTEAD of paying me money it is better (for me, somehow) if you mark in your computer equipment that I am owed a credit. That's a statement that corresponds to entities that actually exist and relations between them. Saying "Bitcoin is money" is a relationship of concepts, one of which does not refer to any physically existing thing at all.
See:
"Concepts are not and cannot be formed in a vacuum; they are formed in a context; the process of conceptualization consists of observing the differences and similarities of the existents within the field of one’s awareness (and organizing them into concepts accordingly). From a child’s grasp of the simplest concept integrating a group of perceptually given concretes, to a scientist’s grasp of the most complex abstractions integrating long conceptual chains—all conceptualization is a contextual process; the context is the entire field of a mind’s awareness or knowledge at any level of its cognitive development.
This does not mean that conceptualization is a subjective process or that the content of concepts depends on an individual’s subjective (i.e., arbitrary) choice. The only issue open to an individual’s choice in this matter is how much knowledge he will seek to acquire and, consequently, what conceptual complexity he will be able to reach. But so long as and to the extent that his mind deals with concepts (as distinguished from memorized sounds and floating abstractions), the content of his concepts is determined and dictated by the cognitive content of his mind, i.e., by his grasp of the facts of reality."
Ayn Rand, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, p.55
Bitcoin does not exist. There are no Bitcoins. That is literally and indisputably true.
What does exist is human beings and computer equipment.
So to speak in a strictly factual way, you should not even claim that Bitcoin is money. You should say that INSTEAD of paying me money it is better (for me, somehow) if you mark in your computer equipment that I am owed a credit. That's a statement that corresponds to entities that actually exist and relations between them. Saying "Bitcoin is money" is a relationship of concepts, one of which does not refer to any physically existing thing at all.
See:
"Concepts are not and cannot be formed in a vacuum; they are formed in a context; the process of conceptualization consists of observing the differences and similarities of the existents within the field of one’s awareness (and organizing them into concepts accordingly). From a child’s grasp of the simplest concept integrating a group of perceptually given concretes, to a scientist’s grasp of the most complex abstractions integrating long conceptual chains—all conceptualization is a contextual process; the context is the entire field of a mind’s awareness or knowledge at any level of its cognitive development.
This does not mean that conceptualization is a subjective process or that the content of concepts depends on an individual’s subjective (i.e., arbitrary) choice. The only issue open to an individual’s choice in this matter is how much knowledge he will seek to acquire and, consequently, what conceptual complexity he will be able to reach. But so long as and to the extent that his mind deals with concepts (as distinguished from memorized sounds and floating abstractions), the content of his concepts is determined and dictated by the cognitive content of his mind, i.e., by his grasp of the facts of reality."
Ayn Rand, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, p.55