This is a critical distinction. 

I personally feel it’s much more intuitive and accurate to call them hardware signers. I’ve had to explain to everyone I’ve set up with a hardware signer that the Sats are not on the device, they never leave the Network, and that the keys are the secret that enables them (or anyone who access to them) to move the Bitcoin. 

They really begin to understand when I walk them through the entire process and have them set up the hardware, copy the seed, and make a couple txs from exchange to self custody. And they start to understand the utility and gravity of Bitcoin at that point too. 

 I completely agree with you, the idea of storing and wallet, creates to much confusion and wrong parallels with the fiat system.

My "aha" moment came when I got the idea of veing in total control of my sats..

 "I can be my own bank.. oh fuck, we don't need bank anymore.. WTF!" 

I remember it like it was yesterday. 

 That’s how I explain Bitcoin to people who ask. 

I say something like: “Bitcoin is a free bank in cyberspace that operates with its own currency. There is no one in charge of the bank but anyone can buy the currency and anyone can use it. Bitcoin can’t be hacked and the rules of the bank can’t be changed so it’s secure and fair for everyone who chooses to use it. There is a finite amount of Bitcoin so everyone’s share of the money supply always stays proportional to the total supply.” 

It works pretty well and they usually have some follow up questions from that starting point. 

 Very well put down, will take note for the future.. I often had complaints about using not easy and too technical terminology.. 😅
Thanks sir 🫂💜 

 My goal is to compare Bitcoin to models and terminology people already understand. Found it works quite well.