he called it a swarm of cyber hornets

michael saylor could have said "bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency." instead he chose to say "a swarm of cyber hornets serving the goddess of wisdom, feeding on the fire of truth."

one describes. the other rewires how you see it.

saylor didn't just buy bitcoin. he bought into language. digital property. apex asset. engineered money rooted in thermodynamic energy. he framed it, not just defined it. this matters more than most people realize.

call it "crypto" and it competes with ten thousand altcoins and memecoins. call it digital gold and suddenly it stands alone. call it engineered money backed by energy and physics... and now you're talking about something that sounds inevitable. the words we use aren't just labels. they're positioning. they shape how newcomers perceive it, how regulators treat it, how history will remember it.

think about how the narrative shifted over the years. ponzi scheme became speculative asset became digital gold became strategic reserve asset. same bitcoin. different language. different outcomes. this is why the "crypto" framing always bothered me. lumping bitcoin in with everything else was never accurate... it was a rhetorical choice that benifited altcoin promoters and confused regulators.

long term this is how bitcoin wins. not just through code and network effects but through the stories we tell about what it is. the institutions piling in now aren't buying "cryptocurrency." they're buying digital property. they're buying scarcity. they're buying something their compliance departments can understand.

language shapes belief. belief shapes capital allocation. capital allocation shapes reality. saylor understood this before most. he didn't just change his balance sheet... he changed the vocabulary. so tell me: what are you calling the thing you're building? and is that language opening doors or closing them?