Makes sense. Coinbase's website is plastered with the term "digital currency" so that seemed the safest to use since I'm not too familiar with that market :)

They do that for their benefit, & for the benefit of their regulator bedfellows (I think). The SEC, for example, dare not mutter the word 'crypto', confirming that Bitcoin et al do actually exist!

> A cryptocurrency does not necessarily have to be stored or generated digitally.

How would a non-digital cryptocurrency work? While signal scramblers, an analog equivalent to digital cryptography, did exist, I have a hard time imagining an analog blockchain.

a block is just a header, a ref to the previous block, a set of tx's and a nonce to satisfy the work function.

It being digital is just its encoding. An analog cryptocurrency could be carved into trees or anything.

Are you confusing digital with electronic? Ones and zeros carved into a tree are still a digital record. Digital refers to the fact the you operate on a set of discrete values, in contrast to a continuum of values. Medium is irrelevant.

Just to be clear. I do agree with the argument above that "cryptocurrency" is a much more fitting term than "digital currency".

Yeah, I think I am confusing the two.

I suspect there are chemical compounds that when reacted can perform analog arithmetic. If you used that to create signing, hashing and propagation logic I dare say analog cryptocurrencies could exist.