1. I'm confussed now, is BTC a commiditoy or an assest ? And how do the centeral banks view it ?
I view Bitcoin 100% as a currency and not commodity. Europe recognizes it as such. The US govt claims it's a commodity. Whatever they classify it as might be entirely motivated by existing taxation structure, so it's kind of irrelevant what random bureaucrats say. If you try to look at it from an angle claiming that Bitcoin can't handle micro-transactions so that makes it a commodity, this is false. All that means is it's a network for wealthy people to place large value transactions and people living in poverty will be priced out.
Having said that, I estimate you only need around 8MB blocks for Bitcoin to be utilized and spread by the middle/upper middle class of 1st world nations as a checkbook type device for large value transactions. 3.2MB blocks + payment channels might give you the equivalent or much higher than 8MB blocks, and that happens in the very near future.
We don't need every poor person in the world to use Bitcoin for it to have value. People who have lots of money are the prime benefactors of Bitcoin because they have the most to lose when the bankers have a bank holiday and freeze their accounts for withdrawal. People with extremely small amounts of money (very poor 3rd world nations) can still use centralized BTC debit card services if they can't afford on-chain transactions.
2. Do you want to say that the new normal for the central banks will be is buying BTC ? If yes, kindly elaborte more about it.
I think once the next Bitcoin bubble occurs, banks and ETFs will be forced into the market, and they'll pump Bitcoin way higher on top of the large gains it already makes. The Winklevoss are some of the most cunning whales in this game having an ETF planned before the thing even got off the ground. People like Max Keiser and Rpietila just bought early and that's about it. Winklevoss bought and built the framework on top of that for it to explode to obscene levels.