Bitcoin as an electronic cash system is something novel. A settlement system isn't. Bitcoin as a [shared worldwide electronic cash system](https://bitcoin.com/bitcoin.pdf) is something novel. A "settlement system" where existing financial institutions extract value through high fees, isn't. Such a settlement system has to compete with what already exists - the infrastructure in the hands of central bankers. When powerful interests in Bitcoin suggested that it should be thought of as "digital gold" or a settlement system instead of directly a day-to-day medium of exchange, they were - knowingly or unknowingly - acting in the interests of the status quo and against the interests of Bitcoin ultimately appreciating and being useful to the most people (like a successful global currency would). Without this appreciation through being useful and thus gaining mass adoption, Bitcoin's "halving" mechanism could be turned into a timebomb that will destroy the network's security in the coming decades, which would put a total end to the "store of value" narrative. TL;DR there are only 2 scenarios for Bitcoin (unless changes are made which entirely change its character and consensus rules): 1. Success through adoption as a global [p2p cash system](https://whybitcoincash.com) 2. Failure, loss of value relative to fiat currency, and disappearing into the footnotes of history#BTC_Bounce_Back_to_57k $BTC
Blockchain is a decentralized, distributed ledger technology that records transactions across multiple computers in a way that makes them tamper-resistant and transparent. Each "block" in the chain contains a cryptographic hash of the previous block, a timestamp, and transaction data. Once recorded, the data in any given block cannot be altered without altering all subsequent blocks, which requires the consensus of the network majority. This makes blockchain secure against fraud and manipulation. It has applications beyond cryptocurrencies, including supply chain management, voting systems, and digital identity verification.