You used a very specific term initially which was hard money. Bitcoin is not hard money because it isn't made of a physical commodity and there is no physical commodity backing it. It is digital and has zero intrinsic value because it's just bits that make up a digital ledger.
The US dollar is also a store of value and billions of people agree it has value, but it isn't really hard money, unless we're talking metal coins because those are actually made out of commodities.
There are some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold. These would be hard money.
Grain has intrinsic nutritive value based on it's physical nature. It doesn't matter if nobody alive considers it worth anything, it still has innate nutritive value.
By the definition I'm using hard money is anything that is hard to produce, can't be diluted, backed by a commodity (energy it takes to produce) and is a store of wealth. In those terms BTC is the hardest money at this time.
Anything can by definition be agreed upon as a store of value. As with a fiat dollar or metal from the ground or digital bits of info. If enough people agree that bits of info which has certain properties as a store of value then it is valuable by definition.
That's a bit like saying you're a good person, but nothing your version of good allows indiscriminate murder. You've added conditions to the term that aren't normally there.
My problem with calling Bitcoin a hard currency is that it has zero intrinsic value, it isn't immutable, and you cannot physically posses it. Why this matters and how it differs from hard money.
No intrinsic value. What is the intrinsic value of bits in a digital blockchain ledger? Nothing, because it only has the valve that other people place on it because you can't do anything with it except move those bits around to put it in different wallets.
Contrast that to commodity based hard money like grain or copper. These have intrinsic value, meaning even if the whole rest of the World decides it is worthless, it still has intrinsic value because I can eat my grain or forge my copper into tools. Your Bitcoin is truly useless without other people valuing it, and that is a problem because:
It's not immutable. Meaning, it can be changed. Bitcoin is really just bits in a digital blockchain. Software manages that blockchain. Software can be changed. The 21 million Bitcoin rule can be changed. If I have a gold coin, all the other owners of gold coins can't decide they're going to change anything about my gold coin. If every Bitcoin node operator decided to run different code that removed the 21 Bitcoin limit or removed your wallet, you'd be screwed because your Bitcoin has no intrinsic value and because other people hold power over it.
You can't physically posses it. That means you are effectively incapable of actually doing anything with it without other entities, which you do not control, being involved.
I can't address all your dialogue but I ask you a simple question. Can you see the internet? Does it have value?
Bitcoin is a shift in thinking. Just like many things through out the ages that require a new way of seeing. A paradigm shift. Bitcoin's value is backed by energy. You don't necessarily need to hold it in your hand to use it. Ask the people of El Salvador how it's working out for them.
There's so much information on YouTube if you really want to educate yourself about one of the greatest shifts in consciousness in regards to how we can store the value of our energy in a sovereign way that is decentralized.
I can see data from the Internet and it certainly has value. However, there are circumstances that can occur that would render it basically worthless, just like internal combustion engine powered cars would become basically worthless if "fossil" fuels were outlawed.
Bitcoin's value is not backed by energy, because I don't redeem it for energy. Also, the amount of energy it takes to generate a Bitcoin has been changing since it started, as has the cost of that energy. In 2010 I generated 1 Bitcoin using about 7 kWh. Today it takes 155,000 kWh or about 22,000 times as much, but the price is not anywhere close to 22,000x what it was.
You used a very specific term initially which was hard money. Bitcoin is not hard money because it isn't made of a physical commodity and there is no physical commodity backing it. It is digital and has zero intrinsic value because it's just bits that make up a digital ledger.
The US dollar is also a store of value and billions of people agree it has value, but it isn't really hard money, unless we're talking metal coins because those are actually made out of commodities.
There are some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold. These would be hard money.
Intrinsic value does not exist. Only subjective value does.
Grain has intrinsic nutritive value based on it's physical nature. It doesn't matter if nobody alive considers it worth anything, it still has innate nutritive value.
Human beings value it subjectively for the capabilities it has, but that is different from intrinsic value.
Intrinsic value does not exist. Only subjective value.
By the definition I'm using hard money is anything that is hard to produce, can't be diluted, backed by a commodity (energy it takes to produce) and is a store of wealth. In those terms BTC is the hardest money at this time.
Anything can by definition be agreed upon as a store of value. As with a fiat dollar or metal from the ground or digital bits of info. If enough people agree that bits of info which has certain properties as a store of value then it is valuable by definition.
That's a bit like saying you're a good person, but nothing your version of good allows indiscriminate murder. You've added conditions to the term that aren't normally there.
My problem with calling Bitcoin a hard currency is that it has zero intrinsic value, it isn't immutable, and you cannot physically posses it. Why this matters and how it differs from hard money.
Contrast that to commodity based hard money like grain or copper. These have intrinsic value, meaning even if the whole rest of the World decides it is worthless, it still has intrinsic value because I can eat my grain or forge my copper into tools. Your Bitcoin is truly useless without other people valuing it, and that is a problem because:
It's not immutable. Meaning, it can be changed. Bitcoin is really just bits in a digital blockchain. Software manages that blockchain. Software can be changed. The 21 million Bitcoin rule can be changed. If I have a gold coin, all the other owners of gold coins can't decide they're going to change anything about my gold coin. If every Bitcoin node operator decided to run different code that removed the 21 Bitcoin limit or removed your wallet, you'd be screwed because your Bitcoin has no intrinsic value and because other people hold power over it.
You can't physically posses it. That means you are effectively incapable of actually doing anything with it without other entities, which you do not control, being involved.
I can't address all your dialogue but I ask you a simple question. Can you see the internet? Does it have value?
Bitcoin is a shift in thinking. Just like many things through out the ages that require a new way of seeing. A paradigm shift. Bitcoin's value is backed by energy. You don't necessarily need to hold it in your hand to use it. Ask the people of El Salvador how it's working out for them.
There's so much information on YouTube if you really want to educate yourself about one of the greatest shifts in consciousness in regards to how we can store the value of our energy in a sovereign way that is decentralized.
I can see data from the Internet and it certainly has value. However, there are circumstances that can occur that would render it basically worthless, just like internal combustion engine powered cars would become basically worthless if "fossil" fuels were outlawed.
Bitcoin's value is not backed by energy, because I don't redeem it for energy. Also, the amount of energy it takes to generate a Bitcoin has been changing since it started, as has the cost of that energy. In 2010 I generated 1 Bitcoin using about 7 kWh. Today it takes 155,000 kWh or about 22,000 times as much, but the price is not anywhere close to 22,000x what it was.