Well, technically you can own a gold ETF rather than physical, and whenever you want to send value to someone, sell it and wire them the money (free on Fidelity and takes on the order of as long as a few Bitcoin confirmations). This is not too different in effect from being able to “send gold”.

Anyway... despite the theoretical limitations of cash, hard currencies in practice have proven much, much more stable than Bitcoin. There hasn’t been hyperinflation in any of the major hard currencies (USD, CNY, GBP, EUR/D-Mark, CHF) since the invention of the fiat system.

You can argue that cash can be manipulated and is therefore a worse store of value than Bitcoin but it simply isn’t backed up by concrete evidence in reality

There was no hyperinflation, but inflation is high enough to matter.

Still, overall damage seems far lower than risks of mistakes, hacks, crashed and scams overrunning crypto. Maybe it is not true for super experts, but for average person loses on inflation will be far lower than overall damage from various dangers present in BTC and other.

> Crypto is made to do one thing - store value, and do it well.

Does it really do it well when your "investment" can fluctuate between $5000 to $40K?

So for example land is counterexample to claim that "crypto beats other stores of value in almost every metric."?

Especially given that you can sell it for something used locally and send that? (there is no need to store value and send something using the same method).

Well bitcoin in particular but some crypto is inflationary also