Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index
by kgwgk on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @11:01AM
(#26090923)
You're right, that wasn't a very good argument.
But the point is that saying that "it has intrinsic value" doesn't really mean anything if one cannot even given an order of magnitude of what it is.
I won't say that the price of gold is directly related to its intrinsic value (there is no way to do "financial valuation" on it) but the situation with bitcoin is even worse. At least there are some industrial uses of gold that can be used to assign an objective value to an ounce of the metal.
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index
by axxxo93 on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @11:31AM
(#26091290)
You're right. Calculating the intrinsic value of something is hard if not impossible. However, I would argue that global network that enables P2P transfer of a scarce asset is quite valuable. Is it more valuable than gold? Maybe. Only time will tell.
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index
by kgwgk on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @11:41AM
(#26091447)
How many hundreds of global networks that enable P2P transfer of scarce assets do we have by now, though?
Re:Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index
by jefftk on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @10:20AM
(#26090273)
> I prefer BTC over gold
What does that mean? That if you had some amount of gold you would sell it and buy bitcoin instead?
This argument doesn't make any sense. I prefer BTC over gold. This does not negate the intrinsic value of gold in any way.