Does anyone else find it ironic that Silk Road was essentially the best use-case for what Bitcoin was always intended to be: purely peer-to-peer electronic cash.

Obviously, what was being bought and sold were terrible things for society, but I just find it funny that Bitcoin is now this difficult and abstract thing explain to people when the original whitepaper made its intentions so clear. Silk Road was legitimately the proper use-case for Bitcoin: pure peer-to-peer electronic cash.

I don't know if "irony" is the right word since it's not technically ironic, but there is something interesting about the fact that this was the perfect use of Bitcoin.

I'm not sure if it's exchanges, how governments have regulated those exchanges, or something else are that changed things, but this "store of value" thing is not what was intended for Bitcoin. You may love the store of value angle or you may hate it, but either way: it's not what Bitcoin was intended to be.