$BTC Bitcoin and gold, which one truly deserves the title of "hard currency"? Should we trust the ancient relics passed down for thousands of years, or take a gamble on the new game woven by code? If you are also wavering between the two, you might want to consider this perspective.

Speaking of which, the proponents of "tokenized gold" always like to emphasize physical backing and traceability. It sounds quite stable, but upon closer inspection—do we really need to rely on some institution to assure us that "there's actually goods in the vault"? Isn't this just the old trick of centralization? Bitcoin doesn't go for that.

Its scarcity is at a mathematical level. 21 million coins, hardcoded in the code, no one can change it. It's transparent to the point where you can verify every transaction in real-time without begging someone to give you proof. And tokenized gold? Essentially it’s still a game of "trust me, the gold is really there," with no reduction in trust costs.

Let's talk about liquidity. Bitcoin operates around the clock, cross-border transfers are not subject to anyone's whims, and it can seamlessly integrate with smart contracts and the DeFi ecosystem. It is no longer just a "place to store money", but the underlying infrastructure of the entire digital economy. Gold tokenization? At best, it's just putting a blockchain shell on traditional assets, without changing the substance.

There is a saying: history always stands by the creators, not by the tape recorders. Bitcoin was born as a native species prepared for the digital world, not a reprint of some relic from an old era.

Which side are you on in this battle over "value storage"? Share your thoughts in the comments.