Today I saw a tweet from GOAT Network that really struck a chord with me. As a project ambassador, I felt a bit excited. The tweet said this is exactly why we are developing the Agent Standard: Bitcoin is the only currency that fully meets this standard. The L2 based on BitVM is currently the only underlying layer that allows Bitcoin to be truly used by machines on a large scale while maintaining minimal trust. This statement sounds simple, but if you think deeper, it actually points out a very real issue. In future economic activities, AI agents will increasingly make decisions and trade on their own. They do not need the payment habits of humans—no apps, no verification codes, no waiting for T+1 to settle. What they need is the ability to transfer funds at any time, at extremely low cost, and with almost unlimited frequency, and this "money" itself cannot be arbitrarily issued, frozen, or have its rules changed by anyone. Whether it's stablecoins or native coins from other public chains, there is always some aspect that humans can intervene in: companies can pause, governance can vote to change parameters, and regulators can intervene directly. Machines will not understand the phrase "this is for everyone's good"; they will only see that the assets suddenly lack predictability. Bitcoin is different. From day one, the cap of 21 million is etched in the code and consensus, and for over a decade, no one has been able to change it, nor can anyone change it. This is the most reliable anchor for a machine that only recognizes rules and not people. On the execution level, Bitcoin itself has low throughput and high fees, so L2 is needed. Many L2 solutions sacrifice security for speed or introduce new trust points. The BitVM approach is different; it tries to keep complex logic off-chain, leaving only final validation and dispute resolution on Bitcoin, with the security assumptions basically not downgraded. GOAT Network is currently moving in this direction. So when they write the Agent Standard, it's not just a random name; they want to clearly define what kind of currency and infrastructure are truly suitable for machines to operate autonomously. I have been watching Bitcoin grow over the years, and I have seen various exciting projects in between, but I gradually realized that many so-called "narratives" do not withstand the test of time. Instead, this most straightforward path—sound money + trust-minimized scaling—seems the most likely to meet the real demands of the next stage.