If I had to pick sides though I think I'd pick the Breez guys and what they're doing over what Michael Saylor is doing

I basically think bitcoin can be used as both a MOE and a SOV and we want to build tech that makes both as simple as possible

Bitcoin is being captured by the narrative of it being a speculative commodity. This narrative has been supported and encouraged by fiat operators. Because as a speculative commodity Bitcoin is of little to no threat to fiat money. It is just another speculative commodity plaything they can KYC, track and trace, deal in and tax. The more Bitcoin is seen as and used as a speculative commodity the less it is used as a p2p payments protocol. How much Bitcoin is now not KYCed and taxed? 10%? Maybe less. By defining Bitcoin as a speculative commodity governments have made use of it as a MoE impractical and largely succeeded in obstructing adoption for use as a payment mechanism. Because as a speculative commodity every time you buy a coffee or zap a comment you are obliged to make a tax liability calculation and pay the tax due. This makes it impracticable for anyone to use Bitcoin as a everyday MoE. It achieves it subtly and slyly without out banning it- but it achieves it nevertheless. The monopoly over MoE is fiats basis of power and Bitcoin has been successfully obstructed from challenging that base. ETFs and strategies like Saylors concentrate custody of Bitcoin into mostly US domiciled institutions. They hold custody and prevent that portion of Bitcojns total issuance from being used as a p2p MoE. They are also vulnerable to any compulsory order the US government may make- such as an Order 6102B- where their holdings could be compulsorily acquired if it was deemed necessary to protect and preserve the strategic integrity of the USD. The original order 6102 was very effective because most of peoples gold hiolding were already held under the custody of banks who could be more easily forced to comply with the order.

As long as Bitcoin remains almost exclusively a speculative commodity no Order 6102B will ever be required- they have succeeded without need for such a crude and overt suppression.

While banking bans on businesses accepting Bitcoin may have reduced under Trump they are still in place in most jurisdictions where Bitcoin is allowed to be traded as a commodity. Here in New Zealand anyone opening a bank account is asked if you are involved in any 'crypto' activity and if you will use the bank account to facilitate any crypto trading. Banks can refuse to provide a bank account if any 'crypto' involvement is declared. Businesses declaring Bitcoin involvement eg accepting it for payment are very unlikely to be accepted as an account holder with the bank.

The obstruction of Bitcoin as a MoE in liberal western democracies is subtle but comprehensive and effective. In autocracies and quasi autocracies like Turkey or Thailand it is usually much more direct with clear bans on use of Bitcoin as a MoE.

Because in both democracies and autocracies, Bitcoin is a real threat to fiat hegemony.

To think that threat is not being taken seriously and obstructed very comprehensively is to be drunk on hopium. Bitcoin is a peaceful revolution - confronting the most powerful, wealthy and determined organised power structures on the planet. Banks and their client governments.

I think this misses the mark because it's not use as MoE that comes first, but rather proof of the MoE potential. Bitcoin is valuable because people expect to be able to exchange it later. This is similar to gold. It doesn't matter that there's almost no gold use as MoE, because we know gold can be used that way, while preserving purchasing power.

How do you use bitcoin day to day?

I don't really get anything out of this post