I often wonder if cryptos are money. Ethereum developers conceived Ether (ETH) as a utility coin to support transactions on the Ethereum network. According to the developers themselves, ETH has never been money. Then the narrative changed, with some people starting to call it "Ultrasound Money." The truth is that it doesn't make sense. Here's why:

• ETH is notoriously volatile. One of the primary functions of money is to serve as a stable store of value. However, Ether's price can swing wildly from day to day, making it an unreliable medium for everyday transactions. Imagine trying to buy a cup of coffee with Ether—the price could double or halve every year.
• While some cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin, have a fixed supply, Ether does not. Ethereum's monetary policy is designed to be somewhat inflationary, with new ETH being issued to reward validators. This constant increase in supply can erode the value of ETH over time, making it less suitable as a long-term store of value.
• Ethereum's architecture is complex, with a base layer (Layer 1) and multiple secondary layers (Layer 2s) designed to improve scalability and reduce transaction costs. While this complexity is necessary for the network's functionality, it makes ETH less accessible and understandable to the average user. Money should be simple and easy to use, not a labyrinth of technical jargon and interconnected systems.

The term "Ultrasound Money" has been thrown around to describe ETH, suggesting that it is somehow superior to traditional fiat currencies. However, this term is more marketing hype than reality. ETH's volatility, inflationary nature, and complexity make it a poor candidate for a stable, reliable form of money.

In conclusion, while ETH has its uses as a utility coin within the Ethereum ecosystem, it falls short as a form of money. The shocking truth is that, despite its hype, ETH doesn't make sense as a stable, reliable currency. It's time to separate the utility of ETH from the fantasy of it being "Ultrasound Money."