Recently debated a Lightning dev about Bitcoin's future.

He argued Bitcoin's value hinges on its future use for everyday purchases like coffee. I questioned blocks times, fees, etc. but also that in a world where BTC price will grind higher for decades every coffee is a bad deal because you can buy two coffees tomorrow with what you spend today.

From there it spiraled into complexity but I realized they completely ignored the concept of lending. I pointed out that gold and buildings are incredibly valuable as assets, have zero velocity of money, and that Bitcoin could easily follow a similar path.

This was blasphemy for them, which is funny, as it has become my default case for Bitcoin.

It was reminder of how the products we build influence our perspectives and vice versa. The protocol incentives act like a lens coloring our predictions: If you build on Lighting you need small fast transactions to matter. If build on an L2 you need Bitcoin to become collateral.