A simple proof that Bitcoin has zero value

[pawel7777]

...
Actually, I am not sure he is just trolling. He has a solid, veeeery theoretical point. Imo, we are just abstractly, in theory, talking about "value" in general and bitcoin. In practice this debate is actually quite meaningless. It is still imo interesting debate.

I know OP from his other threads. Sometimes he is thought-provoking, I'll give him that, but usually he would just waffle around good old "bitcoin is worthless because it has no intrinsic value" rhetoric, acting like he has come up with something new.

In this thread he attempts to re-define the meaning of the word "value" to fit his narrative. I don't think there's a single country in the world that would allow you not to pay taxes on otherwise taxable income just because you take bitcoin as a payment, or allow you to hide your wealth in bitcoin from wife you're divorcing - because it has no value, right?
Any sensible person would rather adjust his definitions to be compatible with the rest of the world - but that wouldn't earn him 5 pages of replies.

[1714692583]

1714692583

[1714692583]

1714692583

[1714692583]

1714692583

[squatter]

Dang it read 4 pages just to realize op is just trolling around, I don't even consider him serious anymore. many people already explained to him in so many ways that even beginners can understand and he just refuses to accept the fact.

Actually, I am not sure he is just trolling. He has a solid, veeeery theoretical point. Imo, we are just abstractly, in theory, talking about "value" in general and bitcoin. In practice this debate is actually quite meaningless. It is still imo interesting debate.

It's interesting for a moment, until you realize that the entire debate hinges on the OP's rigid and arbitrary definitions of "value." He keeps changing the definition of "value" to fit his narrative, and his definitions are completely out of touch with society's. It's a futile exercise to argue against this kind of logic. He may not be intentionally trolling, but his approach is intellectually dishonest.

[zhelis74]

Dang it read 4 pages just to realize op is just trolling around, I don't even consider him serious anymore. many people already explained to him in so many ways that even beginners can understand and he just refuses to accept the fact.

Actually, I am not sure he is just trolling. He has a solid, veeeery theoretical point. Imo, we are just abstractly, in theory, talking about "value" in general and bitcoin. In practice this debate is actually quite meaningless. It is still imo interesting debate.

Yes, he was trying to figure out a philosophical means of logical ideas but it should have not be calculated like that,  he wants to proved that bitcoin is just a number but didn't elaborate that the digital number itself has an equivament value of that real currency. So if I have 2 bitcoins then I will buy many iphones and make it included to its computation.

[bloodyvio]

Dang it read 4 pages just to realize op is just trolling around, I don't even consider him serious anymore. many people already explained to him in so many ways that even beginners can understand and he just refuses to accept the fact.

Actually, I am not sure he is just trolling. He has a solid, veeeery theoretical point. Imo, we are just abstractly, in theory, talking about "value" in general and bitcoin. In practice this debate is actually quite meaningless. It is still imo interesting debate.

Yes, he was trying to figure out a philosophical means of logical ideas but it should have not be calculated like that,  he wants to proved that bitcoin is just a number but didn't elaborate that the digital number itself has an equivament value of that real currency. So if I have 2 bitcoins then I will buy many iphones and make it included to its computation.

he forgot about doing POW on a bitcoin network that requires a lot of money, costs to ensure the data flow remains safe
and this keep increase every day, as Franky1 explained on page one

[halfmil]

The value of anything is subjective. Ask 1000 different people what they think a bitcoin is worth and get 1000 different answers. You see to some people Bitcoin is worth zero because they either don’t care about it or don’t want to use it or maybe even know anything about it. To some people bitcoin is very valuable. It would depend on who you are asking. Everything is only worth what someone else will pay for it. There is no such thing as absolute value. To some people gold and diamonds are just shiny rocks. What is the dollar value you would put on love or a friendship? What is your pet dog or cat worth? What is your time worth? What is your car worth? These questions all have very different answers depending on who you are talking to because value is subjective not objective.

It is mind blowing how you people are poorly educated. The value is NOT subjective. The value of a thing is its ability to provide some utility. The utility of an engine is its ability to perform function - to convert one form of energy into mechanical energy. Now, is the ability to convert energy subjective? Of course, not. That is why if you ask 1000 different people whether a car engine can convert energy you won't get 1000 different answers.

The utility of a heart is its ability to pump blood to the organs and tissues of your body that need the oxygen and nutrients it carries. Now, is this ability subjective? Of course, not.

The utility of fiat money is its ability to provide its owner with assets of the banks or with property of borrowers. And this is also not subjective but legally enforceable, formally recorded in the balance sheets of the banks, and confirmed every time when a borrower if forced to give his property, goods or services to fiat money owners in order to get funds for his loan payments.

Bitcoin on the other hand has no utility, as it is just a byte in a memory.

Don't hurt your mind to much thinking about it. What is really amusing to me is that even though elitist like you have wasted a lot of their life learning facts in higher education they still need poorly educated people like me to school you on what value is.

If "the value of a thing is it's ability to provide some utility" and value is not subjective please tell me what makes a painting or artwork valuable. Why is some art worth nothing and some paintings are worth a million dollars?

Do you really think everyone on this planet values their heart exactly the same even as a utility? There are people on this earth that have some serious problems and are in traumatic consent pain they can only pray and hope that their heart gives out so they may die because that's what they want.

Is an engines sole purpose to convert energy into mechanical energy? Are there not old steam, airplane, and motorcycle engines in museums on display strictly for their design and aesthetic features? Value is always a utility? Is everyone's time worth exactly the same? Is everyone's love and friendship the same?

I don't think the question here is does the heart pump blood or an engine make mechanical power. Of corse it does. Are these things utilities, yes and they are also other things besides utilities. What I am saying here is the value of those things are different to different people and value is subjective not objective. An elitist such as yourself tries to tell people what the value of something is. The truth is you have no say in what is valuable to me or in my life and vice versa.

Values of things are subjective and do not have set prices in which they are worth the same all the time. Even circumstance can make the same item two different prices to the same person.

Bitcoin is worth zero? I'm sorry but this thing you say is worth nothing can buy my airplane ticket to travel across the country so to me it has some value. What you are saying just isn't good enough.

Things need to be utilities for them to have value? Honestly I don't even believe you believe that. I think you are just trying to talk yourself into your weird way of thinking. I'm glad you spent a lot of your time and money going to higher education to learn how to make a simple chart to explain to others the way you think is better then the way they think. I'm happy for you. You have the world figured out. But in all honesty I don't think anyone here really cares and if I were you I'd go get my money back from that fancy college if that's as much critical thinking that they are teaching nowadays.

You do not seem to sure of yourself. Keep trying though, this is a strong subject for such a weak mind.

You haven't schooled me, you just repeated the same nonsense I already refuted.

Painting is valuable because it provides a perceptual experience of satisfaction or pleasure. Pleasure is a mental state that humans experience as positive, enjoyable, or worth seeking. Or put simply, pleasure is a human need, it drives us, the way hunger does or fear. That is why painting is valuable - its inherent properties are able to satisfy human needs. Now, the degree to which something is experienced as pleasurable, together with someone's wealth, determine how much someone is willing to pay for it. Thus, value is objective since it is inherent to a picture, while price is subjective since it is inherent to a person.

Inherent property of a dollar is its claim status, which can ultimately provide its holder with goods, services or property of borrowers. And it is this inherent property what makes dollar valuable.

Even a rock, due to its inherent property of hardness, is valuable  - it can be used as a weapon and save human life in some circumstances. In that case, a person might pay a million dollars for it.

But, can for e.g. a particle which comprises a rock be used to save human life? No. Can it be used to satisfy other human needs? No. That is why this particle is valueless. Simply put, its inherent properties cannot provide utility to people. The same is true for Bitcoin. It is a number, it is an abstract mathematical object, it is mere byte in a memory whose inherent properties cannot provide utility to people. That is why it is valueless.

Value is based on belief it is not objective. Belief and value are both subjective.

What you are telling me and everyone here is the only reason anyone buys a painting or the only emotion a painting gives is pleasure.. You really think anyone is buying that garbage? The degree to which something is pleasurable is also different among people. Two people may look at the same painting and feel differently about it. It is not only the paint and canvas that can give objective value to a painting it is the emotion behind it. Sometimes that emotion is pleasure but not all the time. Sometimes that emotion is a wide range of other emotions. One person may see a painting and get pleasure from it and another may see the same painting and not get pleasure from it. It does not convey the same emotion to everyone. It is subjective. Art is subjective, and the value of art is subjective. It's not that hard to understand.

Why is a $5 bill worth 5 times more then a $1 bill? A $5 bill isn't 5 times bigger. It doesn't have 5 times more ink on it. What is the reason it is worth 5 times more? If you get everyone to believe that it is worth 5 times more then it is true. Just because something is legally enforceable or true does not mean it is right.

"Even a rock, due to its inherent property of hardness, is valuable  - it can be used as a weapon and save human life in some circumstances. In that case, a person might pay a million dollars for it.."  This is about the smartest thing you will probably ever say. I'd think about this for a while if I were you.

Here is where your logic breaks down though. A particle of a rock is not a rock. A rock is a lot of rock particles put together that make a rock. These are two different things. Is a particle of a human a human? No you need a lot of different particles put together to make a human.

Who are you to tell anyone what the value of a rock particle is anyway? That is something for individuals to decide for themselves. You do not speak for everyone when you say what is valuable for human needs you speak for yourself. Maybe this rock particle came from the moon, or a far away planet. Maybe it's value to someone is something more then it's inherent hardness. This is where your elitist attitude fails. You have no say in what two people find value in. If two people want to trade something between each other that has no value to you or human kind why would you even care? It's none of your business in the first place.

I'll break it down in the stupidest way I can. Hopefully you will be able to understand. Person A draws a number 1 on a piece of paper and Person B draws a number 3 on a piece of paper. Person A and person B like each others number better and want to trade these pieces of paper with each other and they are both happy with that. You being elitist person C have no business telling person A and B what they can do, trade between each other or find value in. This fact right here destroys pretty much everything you are saying.

By your own words you say email has value because it contains information about some aspect of reality. The blockchain holds this same type of information. The blockchain is a record of truth.

Even rock particles have some value for the simple fact they exist. Anything that exists can be traded between two people and can be a utility.

The more time that passes the more people will start to find more use from cryptocurrency. Each time this happens it will add more value to it and what you are saying will become less creditable.

[halfmil]

...
Actually, I am not sure he is just trolling. He has a solid, veeeery theoretical point. Imo, we are just abstractly, in theory, talking about "value" in general and bitcoin. In practice this debate is actually quite meaningless. It is still imo interesting debate.

I know OP from his other threads. Sometimes he is thought-provoking, I'll give him that, but usually he would just waffle around good old "bitcoin is worthless because it has no intrinsic value" rhetoric, acting like he has come up with something new.

In this thread he attempts to re-define the meaning of the word "value" to fit his narrative. I don't think there's a single country in the world that would allow you not to pay taxes on otherwise taxable income just because you take bitcoin as a payment, or allow you to hide your wealth in bitcoin from wife you're divorcing - because it has no value, right?
Any sensible person would rather adjust his definitions to be compatible with the rest of the world - but that wouldn't earn him 5 pages of replies.

I have heard that bitcoin has no intrinsic value countless times from naysayers but I don't think that is the case. Correct me if I am wrong but the bitcoins that are printed on paper that come out of those bitcoin atm machines with the qr code on them have every bit of intrinsic value as paper money has. As in you can use them to write on, or start a fire with ect.. matter of fact you can just carve a wallet address or put a qr code on anything you want like a bar of gold or like those physical bitcoins they sell that you can load the amount of BTC you want on it. Bitcoin does not have intrinsic value because it doesn't need to have it but anyone can give bitcoin intrinsic value by turning it into something physical they can hold if they want to.

[fxsurfer]

Bitcoin has value, because a lot of resources must be spent (hardware, electricity and bandwidth) to mine Bitcoins. Gold and Silver are unfounded but they have value, because it’s difficult to be found and mined. The same applies to Bitcoin. Bitcoin has unique features, so people want it, and they pay for it.

So, Bitcoin HAS value. Countries tolerate Bitcoin, because they know that it has value, and it’s not a scam.

Your logic is wrong. If a guy who lives in Australia goes to France just to get a grain of sand from a beach in St Tropez, he would spend lots of resources to "mine" that grain of sand. But, does that mean a grain of sand has value? Of course not. Value of X comes from the utility of X, which will stay the same regardless of the resources required to get it. X will stay X, sand will stay sand and number(bitcoin) will stay number even if trillions of dollars are spent to get them. 

So, your argument in the form: "Bitcoin is mined -> mining requires resources (hardware, electricity) ->  resources have value -> therefore Bitcoin has value", is invalid.  If an effect is caused by something that is very valuable this won't make effect valuable. For e.g., smashing Bugatti Veyron into the wall won't make damaged wall valuable.

It is mind-blowing how many irrational excuses are used here just to justify the ownership of a worthless number which occupies one byte in a publicly distributed database.

[fxsurfer]

The value of anything is subjective. Ask 1000 different people what they think a bitcoin is worth and get 1000 different answers. You see to some people Bitcoin is worth zero because they either don’t care about it or don’t want to use it or maybe even know anything about it. To some people bitcoin is very valuable. It would depend on who you are asking. Everything is only worth what someone else will pay for it. There is no such thing as absolute value. To some people gold and diamonds are just shiny rocks. What is the dollar value you would put on love or a friendship? What is your pet dog or cat worth? What is your time worth? What is your car worth? These questions all have very different answers depending on who you are talking to because value is subjective not objective.

It is mind blowing how you people are poorly educated. The value is NOT subjective. The value of a thing is its ability to provide some utility. The utility of an engine is its ability to perform function - to convert one form of energy into mechanical energy. Now, is the ability to convert energy subjective? Of course, not. That is why if you ask 1000 different people whether a car engine can convert energy you won't get 1000 different answers.

The utility of a heart is its ability to pump blood to the organs and tissues of your body that need the oxygen and nutrients it carries. Now, is this ability subjective? Of course, not.

The utility of fiat money is its ability to provide its owner with assets of the banks or with property of borrowers. And this is also not subjective but legally enforceable, formally recorded in the balance sheets of the banks, and confirmed every time when a borrower if forced to give his property, goods or services to fiat money owners in order to get funds for his loan payments.

Bitcoin on the other hand has no utility, as it is just a byte in a memory.

Don't hurt your mind to much thinking about it. What is really amusing to me is that even though elitist like you have wasted a lot of their life learning facts in higher education they still need poorly educated people like me to school you on what value is.

If "the value of a thing is it's ability to provide some utility" and value is not subjective please tell me what makes a painting or artwork valuable. Why is some art worth nothing and some paintings are worth a million dollars?

Do you really think everyone on this planet values their heart exactly the same even as a utility? There are people on this earth that have some serious problems and are in traumatic consent pain they can only pray and hope that their heart gives out so they may die because that's what they want.

Is an engines sole purpose to convert energy into mechanical energy? Are there not old steam, airplane, and motorcycle engines in museums on display strictly for their design and aesthetic features? Value is always a utility? Is everyone's time worth exactly the same? Is everyone's love and friendship the same?

I don't think the question here is does the heart pump blood or an engine make mechanical power. Of corse it does. Are these things utilities, yes and they are also other things besides utilities. What I am saying here is the value of those things are different to different people and value is subjective not objective. An elitist such as yourself tries to tell people what the value of something is. The truth is you have no say in what is valuable to me or in my life and vice versa.

Values of things are subjective and do not have set prices in which they are worth the same all the time. Even circumstance can make the same item two different prices to the same person.

Bitcoin is worth zero? I'm sorry but this thing you say is worth nothing can buy my airplane ticket to travel across the country so to me it has some value. What you are saying just isn't good enough.

Things need to be utilities for them to have value? Honestly I don't even believe you believe that. I think you are just trying to talk yourself into your weird way of thinking. I'm glad you spent a lot of your time and money going to higher education to learn how to make a simple chart to explain to others the way you think is better then the way they think. I'm happy for you. You have the world figured out. But in all honesty I don't think anyone here really cares and if I were you I'd go get my money back from that fancy college if that's as much critical thinking that they are teaching nowadays.

You do not seem to sure of yourself. Keep trying though, this is a strong subject for such a weak mind.

You haven't schooled me, you just repeated the same nonsense I already refuted.

Painting is valuable because it provides a perceptual experience of satisfaction or pleasure. Pleasure is a mental state that humans experience as positive, enjoyable, or worth seeking. Or put simply, pleasure is a human need, it drives us, the way hunger does or fear. That is why painting is valuable - its inherent properties are able to satisfy human needs. Now, the degree to which something is experienced as pleasurable, together with someone's wealth, determine how much someone is willing to pay for it. Thus, value is objective since it is inherent to a picture, while price is subjective since it is inherent to a person.

Inherent property of a dollar is its claim status, which can ultimately provide its holder with goods, services or property of borrowers. And it is this inherent property what makes dollar valuable.

Even a rock, due to its inherent property of hardness, is valuable  - it can be used as a weapon and save human life in some circumstances. In that case, a person might pay a million dollars for it.

But, can for e.g. a particle which comprises a rock be used to save human life? No. Can it be used to satisfy other human needs? No. That is why this particle is valueless. Simply put, its inherent properties cannot provide utility to people. The same is true for Bitcoin. It is a number, it is an abstract mathematical object, it is mere byte in a memory whose inherent properties cannot provide utility to people. That is why it is valueless.

Value is based on belief it is not objective. Belief and value are both subjective.

What you are telling me and everyone here is the only reason anyone buys a painting or the only emotion a painting gives is pleasure.. You really think anyone is buying that garbage? The degree to which something is pleasurable is also different among people. Two people may look at the same painting and feel differently about it. It is not only the paint and canvas that can give objective value to a painting it is the emotion behind it. Sometimes that emotion is pleasure but not all the time. Sometimes that emotion is a wide range of other emotions. One person may see a painting and get pleasure from it and another may see the same painting and not get pleasure from it. It does not convey the same emotion to everyone. It is subjective. Art is subjective, and the value of art is subjective. It's not that hard to understand.

Why is a $5 bill worth 5 times more then a $1 bill? A $5 bill isn't 5 times bigger. It doesn't have 5 times more ink on it. What is the reason it is worth 5 times more? If you get everyone to believe that it is worth 5 times more then it is true. Just because something is legally enforceable or true does not mean it is right.

"Even a rock, due to its inherent property of hardness, is valuable  - it can be used as a weapon and save human life in some circumstances. In that case, a person might pay a million dollars for it.."  This is about the smartest thing you will probably ever say. I'd think about this for a while if I were you.

Here is where your logic breaks down though. A particle of a rock is not a rock. A rock is a lot of rock particles put together that make a rock. These are two different things. Is a particle of a human a human? No you need a lot of different particles put together to make a human.

Who are you to tell anyone what the value of a rock particle is anyway? That is something for individuals to decide for themselves. You do not speak for everyone when you say what is valuable for human needs you speak for yourself. Maybe this rock particle came from the moon, or a far away planet. Maybe it's value to someone is something more then it's inherent hardness. This is where your elitist attitude fails. You have no say in what two people find value in. If two people want to trade something between each other that has no value to you or human kind why would you even care? It's none of your business in the first place.

I'll break it down in the stupidest way I can. Hopefully you will be able to understand. Person A draws a number 1 on a piece of paper and Person B draws a number 3 on a piece of paper. Person A and person B like each others number better and want to trade these pieces of paper with each other and they are both happy with that. You being elitist person C have no business telling person A and B what they can do, trade between each other or find value in. This fact right here destroys pretty much everything you are saying.

By your own words you say email has value because it contains information about some aspect of reality. The blockchain holds this same type of information. The blockchain is a record of truth.

Even rock particles have some value for the simple fact they exist. Anything that exists can be traded between two people and can be a utility.

The more time that passes the more people will start to find more use from cryptocurrency. Each time this happens it will add more value to it and what you are saying will become less creditable.

I already responded to all these points, but there is one more point that I want to add, since people here constantly conflate the degree of value of X and value of X. Of course that the degree of value varies with regards to the subjective preferences of people and the circumstances in which they find themselves. The degree of water value for a man dying of thirst in a desert if obviously higher then for a man who stays in the Plaza Hotel. But this has nothing to do with value of water. Water is valuable because it can provide utility to people and this is true regardless of the degree of water value. So, value is indeed based on subjective preferences, but only in the case of things that already have value, i.e. things whose inherent properties can provide utility to people. Bitcoin - a byte in a memory and a grain of sand cannot provide such utility, so the above subjectivity does not apply to them. Or to put it another way, subjectivity cannot make valueless thing valuable - it can only change the degree of value of valuable things.

[dohh]

I already responded to all these points, but there is one more point that I want to add, since people here constantly conflate the degree of value of X and value of X. Of course that the degree of value varies with regards to the subjective preferences of people and the circumstances in which they find themselves. The degree of water value for a man dying of thirst in a desert if obviously higher then for a man who stays in the Plaza Hotel. But this has nothing to do with value of water. Water is valuable because it can provide utility to people and this is true regardless of the degree of water value. So, value is indeed based on subjective preferences, but only in the case of things that already have value, i.e. things whose inherent properties can provide utility to people. Bitcoin - a byte in a memory and a grain of sand cannot provide such utility, so the above subjectivity does not apply to them. Or to put it another way, subjectivity cannot make valueless thing valuable - it can only change the degree of value of valuable things.

Another series of bullshit.

1) water provides  degree of utility to people in certain circumstances and therefore definitely varies in value, depending on context. A dying man´s body absorbs water, giving it a value as high as life. I, on the other hand, drink at the moment water out of boredom and pee out most of it. This concrete portion of water has day and night difference of value for me and dying man.

2) Bitcoin, byte or not, has some value. Most of people here would give me water in return of BTC. So BTC is subjectively valuable for them, if I really need water, its valuable for me too. If no person on earth would trade me water in return of BTC, it would have zero value for me, therefore being valueless.

3) Now You are retreating from Your own arguments. If subjectivity can change degree of value, then it can also make valueless things valuable and vice versa. Valueless thing is a valuable thing with value degree of zero for that subject.

[halfmil]

The value of anything is subjective. Ask 1000 different people what they think a bitcoin is worth and get 1000 different answers. You see to some people Bitcoin is worth zero because they either don’t care about it or don’t want to use it or maybe even know anything about it. To some people bitcoin is very valuable. It would depend on who you are asking. Everything is only worth what someone else will pay for it. There is no such thing as absolute value. To some people gold and diamonds are just shiny rocks. What is the dollar value you would put on love or a friendship? What is your pet dog or cat worth? What is your time worth? What is your car worth? These questions all have very different answers depending on who you are talking to because value is subjective not objective.

It is mind blowing how you people are poorly educated. The value is NOT subjective. The value of a thing is its ability to provide some utility. The utility of an engine is its ability to perform function - to convert one form of energy into mechanical energy. Now, is the ability to convert energy subjective? Of course, not. That is why if you ask 1000 different people whether a car engine can convert energy you won't get 1000 different answers.

The utility of a heart is its ability to pump blood to the organs and tissues of your body that need the oxygen and nutrients it carries. Now, is this ability subjective? Of course, not.

The utility of fiat money is its ability to provide its owner with assets of the banks or with property of borrowers. And this is also not subjective but legally enforceable, formally recorded in the balance sheets of the banks, and confirmed every time when a borrower if forced to give his property, goods or services to fiat money owners in order to get funds for his loan payments.

Bitcoin on the other hand has no utility, as it is just a byte in a memory.

Don't hurt your mind to much thinking about it. What is really amusing to me is that even though elitist like you have wasted a lot of their life learning facts in higher education they still need poorly educated people like me to school you on what value is.

If "the value of a thing is it's ability to provide some utility" and value is not subjective please tell me what makes a painting or artwork valuable. Why is some art worth nothing and some paintings are worth a million dollars?

Do you really think everyone on this planet values their heart exactly the same even as a utility? There are people on this earth that have some serious problems and are in traumatic consent pain they can only pray and hope that their heart gives out so they may die because that's what they want.

Is an engines sole purpose to convert energy into mechanical energy? Are there not old steam, airplane, and motorcycle engines in museums on display strictly for their design and aesthetic features? Value is always a utility? Is everyone's time worth exactly the same? Is everyone's love and friendship the same?

I don't think the question here is does the heart pump blood or an engine make mechanical power. Of corse it does. Are these things utilities, yes and they are also other things besides utilities. What I am saying here is the value of those things are different to different people and value is subjective not objective. An elitist such as yourself tries to tell people what the value of something is. The truth is you have no say in what is valuable to me or in my life and vice versa.

Values of things are subjective and do not have set prices in which they are worth the same all the time. Even circumstance can make the same item two different prices to the same person.

Bitcoin is worth zero? I'm sorry but this thing you say is worth nothing can buy my airplane ticket to travel across the country so to me it has some value. What you are saying just isn't good enough.

Things need to be utilities for them to have value? Honestly I don't even believe you believe that. I think you are just trying to talk yourself into your weird way of thinking. I'm glad you spent a lot of your time and money going to higher education to learn how to make a simple chart to explain to others the way you think is better then the way they think. I'm happy for you. You have the world figured out. But in all honesty I don't think anyone here really cares and if I were you I'd go get my money back from that fancy college if that's as much critical thinking that they are teaching nowadays.

You do not seem to sure of yourself. Keep trying though, this is a strong subject for such a weak mind.

You haven't schooled me, you just repeated the same nonsense I already refuted.

Painting is valuable because it provides a perceptual experience of satisfaction or pleasure. Pleasure is a mental state that humans experience as positive, enjoyable, or worth seeking. Or put simply, pleasure is a human need, it drives us, the way hunger does or fear. That is why painting is valuable - its inherent properties are able to satisfy human needs. Now, the degree to which something is experienced as pleasurable, together with someone's wealth, determine how much someone is willing to pay for it. Thus, value is objective since it is inherent to a picture, while price is subjective since it is inherent to a person.

Inherent property of a dollar is its claim status, which can ultimately provide its holder with goods, services or property of borrowers. And it is this inherent property what makes dollar valuable.

Even a rock, due to its inherent property of hardness, is valuable  - it can be used as a weapon and save human life in some circumstances. In that case, a person might pay a million dollars for it.

But, can for e.g. a particle which comprises a rock be used to save human life? No. Can it be used to satisfy other human needs? No. That is why this particle is valueless. Simply put, its inherent properties cannot provide utility to people. The same is true for Bitcoin. It is a number, it is an abstract mathematical object, it is mere byte in a memory whose inherent properties cannot provide utility to people. That is why it is valueless.

Value is based on belief it is not objective. Belief and value are both subjective.

What you are telling me and everyone here is the only reason anyone buys a painting or the only emotion a painting gives is pleasure.. You really think anyone is buying that garbage? The degree to which something is pleasurable is also different among people. Two people may look at the same painting and feel differently about it. It is not only the paint and canvas that can give objective value to a painting it is the emotion behind it. Sometimes that emotion is pleasure but not all the time. Sometimes that emotion is a wide range of other emotions. One person may see a painting and get pleasure from it and another may see the same painting and not get pleasure from it. It does not convey the same emotion to everyone. It is subjective. Art is subjective, and the value of art is subjective. It's not that hard to understand.

Why is a $5 bill worth 5 times more then a $1 bill? A $5 bill isn't 5 times bigger. It doesn't have 5 times more ink on it. What is the reason it is worth 5 times more? If you get everyone to believe that it is worth 5 times more then it is true. Just because something is legally enforceable or true does not mean it is right.

"Even a rock, due to its inherent property of hardness, is valuable  - it can be used as a weapon and save human life in some circumstances. In that case, a person might pay a million dollars for it.."  This is about the smartest thing you will probably ever say. I'd think about this for a while if I were you.

Here is where your logic breaks down though. A particle of a rock is not a rock. A rock is a lot of rock particles put together that make a rock. These are two different things. Is a particle of a human a human? No you need a lot of different particles put together to make a human.

Who are you to tell anyone what the value of a rock particle is anyway? That is something for individuals to decide for themselves. You do not speak for everyone when you say what is valuable for human needs you speak for yourself. Maybe this rock particle came from the moon, or a far away planet. Maybe it's value to someone is something more then it's inherent hardness. This is where your elitist attitude fails. You have no say in what two people find value in. If two people want to trade something between each other that has no value to you or human kind why would you even care? It's none of your business in the first place.

I'll break it down in the stupidest way I can. Hopefully you will be able to understand. Person A draws a number 1 on a piece of paper and Person B draws a number 3 on a piece of paper. Person A and person B like each others number better and want to trade these pieces of paper with each other and they are both happy with that. You being elitist person C have no business telling person A and B what they can do, trade between each other or find value in. This fact right here destroys pretty much everything you are saying.

By your own words you say email has value because it contains information about some aspect of reality. The blockchain holds this same type of information. The blockchain is a record of truth.

Even rock particles have some value for the simple fact they exist. Anything that exists can be traded between two people and can be a utility.

The more time that passes the more people will start to find more use from cryptocurrency. Each time this happens it will add more value to it and what you are saying will become less creditable.

I already responded to all these points, but there is one more point that I want to add, since people here constantly conflate the degree of value of X and value of X. Of course that the degree of value varies with regards to the subjective preferences of people and the circumstances in which they find themselves. The degree of water value for a man dying of thirst in a desert if obviously higher then for a man who stays in the Plaza Hotel. But this has nothing to do with value of water. Water is valuable because it can provide utility to people and this is true regardless of the degree of water value. So, value is indeed based on subjective preferences, but only in the case of things that already have value, i.e. things whose inherent properties can provide utility to people. Bitcoin - a byte in a memory and a grain of sand cannot provide such utility, so the above subjectivity does not apply to them. Or to put it another way, subjectivity cannot make valueless thing valuable - it can only change the degree of value of valuable things.

I don’t believe you responded to any of those points. But here is what I will tell you. The truth is multi layered and there are a lot of facts in life. You speak in half truths.

The truth is water is only a valuable utility to people that want to live. Some people would rather die then to do something they don’t want to do to get water. To these people water is valueless. Zero. Zilch.

So now you have agreed that value is subjective but only to things that have value in the first place..

Bitcoin can be traded between people. This fact alone gives it value.

Physical bitcoins have intrinsic value. How can something with intrinsic value be worth zero?

[fxsurfer]

I already responded to all these points, but there is one more point that I want to add, since people here constantly conflate the degree of value of X and value of X. Of course that the degree of value varies with regards to the subjective preferences of people and the circumstances in which they find themselves. The degree of water value for a man dying of thirst in a desert if obviously higher then for a man who stays in the Plaza Hotel. But this has nothing to do with value of water. Water is valuable because it can provide utility to people and this is true regardless of the degree of water value. So, value is indeed based on subjective preferences, but only in the case of things that already have value, i.e. things whose inherent properties can provide utility to people. Bitcoin - a byte in a memory and a grain of sand cannot provide such utility, so the above subjectivity does not apply to them. Or to put it another way, subjectivity cannot make valueless thing valuable - it can only change the degree of value of valuable things.

Another series of bullshit.

1) water provides  degree of utility to people in certain circumstances and therefore definitely varies in value, depending on context. A dying man´s body absorbs water, giving it a value as high as life. I, on the other hand, drink at the moment water out of boredom and pee out most of it. This concrete portion of water has day and night difference of value for me and dying man.

2) Bitcoin, byte or not, has some value. Most of people here would give me water in return of BTC. So BTC is subjectively valuable for them, if I really need water, its valuable for me too. If no person on earth would trade me water in return of BTC, it would have zero value for me, therefore being valueless.

3) Now You are retreating from Your own arguments. If subjectivity can change degree of value, then it can also make valueless things valuable and vice versa. Valueless thing is a valuable thing with value degree of zero for that subject.

From the premise: most of people would give me X in return of Y it does not follow: X has value. People can give things for various reasons, be it: ignorance, stupidity, fraud, manipulation, etc. A lot of people had given their money to enter in various pyramid schemes. But that didn't make these schemes valuable. Hence, your logic is flawed.

[fxsurfer]

I don’t believe you responded to any of those points. But here is what I will tell you. The truth is multi layered and there are a lot of facts in life. You speak in half truths.

The truth is water is only a valuable utility to people that want to live. Some people would rather die then to do something they don’t want to do to get water. To these people water is valueless. Zero. Zilch.

So now you have agreed that value is subjective but only to things that have value in the first place..

Bitcoin can be traded between people. This fact alone gives it value.

Physical bitcoins have intrinsic value. How can something with intrinsic value be worth zero?

Your belief is your personal problem.

Regarding people that would rather die. Value of X is not based on wants of some people, but on the ability of a thing to provide utility to human beings/humans/Homo sapiens. 'Wish to die' does not belong to the definition of Homo sapiens.

Everything that is made up of atoms can be traded between people but this is not what gives value to things.

[dohh]

I already responded to all these points, but there is one more point that I want to add, since people here constantly conflate the degree of value of X and value of X. Of course that the degree of value varies with regards to the subjective preferences of people and the circumstances in which they find themselves. The degree of water value for a man dying of thirst in a desert if obviously higher then for a man who stays in the Plaza Hotel. But this has nothing to do with value of water. Water is valuable because it can provide utility to people and this is true regardless of the degree of water value. So, value is indeed based on subjective preferences, but only in the case of things that already have value, i.e. things whose inherent properties can provide utility to people. Bitcoin - a byte in a memory and a grain of sand cannot provide such utility, so the above subjectivity does not apply to them. Or to put it another way, subjectivity cannot make valueless thing valuable - it can only change the degree of value of valuable things.

Another series of bullshit.

1) water provides  degree of utility to people in certain circumstances and therefore definitely varies in value, depending on context. A dying man´s body absorbs water, giving it a value as high as life. I, on the other hand, drink at the moment water out of boredom and pee out most of it. This concrete portion of water has day and night difference of value for me and dying man.

2) Bitcoin, byte or not, has some value. Most of people here would give me water in return of BTC. So BTC is subjectively valuable for them, if I really need water, its valuable for me too. If no person on earth would trade me water in return of BTC, it would have zero value for me, therefore being valueless.

3) Now You are retreating from Your own arguments. If subjectivity can change degree of value, then it can also make valueless things valuable and vice versa. Valueless thing is a valuable thing with value degree of zero for that subject.

From the premise: most of people would give me X in return of Y it does not follow: X has value. People can give things for various reasons, be it: ignorance, stupidity, fraud, manipulation, etc. A lot of people had given their money to enter in various pyramid schemes. But that didn't make these schemes valuable. Hence, your logic is flawed.

You are going a it off-topic, but are still wrong.

Even being involved in pyramid schemes can be valuable, althought in criminal way. In that case valuable is position, in which You have joined and which allows You to scam those other people, who lose money. Those positions have very high value for criminals, who are masterminds and early joiners into scheme.

Same goes for BTC scheme. What is most valuable in this scheme, is position of early miners, when "mining" could have called accordingly only because the mechanism of process was similar. Thore were essentially free "game coins", which also were valued accordingly 0,01 USD etc.

[halfmil]

I don’t believe you responded to any of those points. But here is what I will tell you. The truth is multi layered and there are a lot of facts in life. You speak in half truths.

The truth is water is only a valuable utility to people that want to live. Some people would rather die then to do something they don’t want to do to get water. To these people water is valueless. Zero. Zilch.

So now you have agreed that value is subjective but only to things that have value in the first place..

Bitcoin can be traded between people. This fact alone gives it value.

Physical bitcoins have intrinsic value. How can something with intrinsic value be worth zero?

Your belief is your personal problem.

Regarding people that would rather die. Value of X is not based on wants of some people, but on the ability of a thing to provide utility to human beings/humans/Homo sapiens. 'Wish to die' does not belong to the definition of Homo sapiens.

Everything that is made up of atoms can be traded between people but this is not what gives value to things.

Again, you do not speak for all homo sapains. But is there a reason you skipped the fact that physical bitcoins have intrinsic value? Or are you just choosing to ignore that fact?

[fxsurfer]

I already responded to all these points, but there is one more point that I want to add, since people here constantly conflate the degree of value of X and value of X. Of course that the degree of value varies with regards to the subjective preferences of people and the circumstances in which they find themselves. The degree of water value for a man dying of thirst in a desert if obviously higher then for a man who stays in the Plaza Hotel. But this has nothing to do with value of water. Water is valuable because it can provide utility to people and this is true regardless of the degree of water value. So, value is indeed based on subjective preferences, but only in the case of things that already have value, i.e. things whose inherent properties can provide utility to people. Bitcoin - a byte in a memory and a grain of sand cannot provide such utility, so the above subjectivity does not apply to them. Or to put it another way, subjectivity cannot make valueless thing valuable - it can only change the degree of value of valuable things.

Another series of bullshit.

1) water provides  degree of utility to people in certain circumstances and therefore definitely varies in value, depending on context. A dying man´s body absorbs water, giving it a value as high as life. I, on the other hand, drink at the moment water out of boredom and pee out most of it. This concrete portion of water has day and night difference of value for me and dying man.

2) Bitcoin, byte or not, has some value. Most of people here would give me water in return of BTC. So BTC is subjectively valuable for them, if I really need water, its valuable for me too. If no person on earth would trade me water in return of BTC, it would have zero value for me, therefore being valueless.

3) Now You are retreating from Your own arguments. If subjectivity can change degree of value, then it can also make valueless things valuable and vice versa. Valueless thing is a valuable thing with value degree of zero for that subject.

From the premise: most of people would give me X in return of Y it does not follow: X has value. People can give things for various reasons, be it: ignorance, stupidity, fraud, manipulation, etc. A lot of people had given their money to enter in various pyramid schemes. But that didn't make these schemes valuable. Hence, your logic is flawed.

You are going a it off-topic, but are still wrong.

Even being involved in pyramid schemes can be valuable, althought in criminal way. In that case valuable is position, in which You have joined and which allows You to scam those other people, who lose money. Those positions have very high value for criminals, who are masterminds and early joiners into scheme.

Same goes for BTC scheme. What is most valuable in this scheme, is position of early miners, when "mining" could have called accordingly only because the mechanism of process was similar. Thore were essentially free "game coins", which also were valued accordingly 0,01 USD etc.

Of course, for Satoshi and other early miners "BTC scheme" was very valuable. But bitcoin - symbol/number/byte that is connected to the name of John Doe is not valuable because of that. This byte was just used as means to transfer value from pocket of John Doe to the pockets of Satoshi and early miners. Numbers couldn't provide them utility, which is why they used BTC scheme to get that utility in things they can eat, drink, wear, drive, sit on, enter into, please the aesthetic senses, legally enforce(fiat money), etc. Worthless numbers are left to people like you, who are as a result, forced to find value in valuelessness, by using a series of irrational excuses.

[dohh]

You are going a it off-topic, but are still wrong.

Even being involved in pyramid schemes can be valuable, althought in criminal way. In that case valuable is position, in which You have joined and which allows You to scam those other people, who lose money. Those positions have very high value for criminals, who are masterminds and early joiners into scheme.

Same goes for BTC scheme. What is most valuable in this scheme, is position of early miners, when "mining" could have called accordingly only because the mechanism of process was similar. Thore were essentially free "game coins", which also were valued accordingly 0,01 USD etc.

Of course, for Satoshi and other early miners "BTC scheme" was very valuable. But bitcoin - symbol/number/byte that is connected to the name of John Doe is not valuable because of that. This byte was just used as means to transfer value from pocket of John Doe to the pockets of Satoshi and early miners. Numbers couldn't provide them utility, which is why they used BTC scheme to get that utility in things they can eat, drink, wear, drive, sit on, enter into, please the aesthetic senses, legally enforce(fiat money), etc. Worthless numbers are left to people like you, who are as a result, forced to find value in valuelessness, by using a series of irrational excuses.
[/quote]

Precicely and that is BTCs value for Satoshi and early miners!

Now, there is not just Satoshi and early miners, but a group of relatively early miners, then mid-time miners and so on... For each of them BTC scheme scammed some money, therefore being valueable same was as to early miners, just in less amount.

[fxsurfer]

I don’t believe you responded to any of those points. But here is what I will tell you. The truth is multi layered and there are a lot of facts in life. You speak in half truths.

The truth is water is only a valuable utility to people that want to live. Some people would rather die then to do something they don’t want to do to get water. To these people water is valueless. Zero. Zilch.

So now you have agreed that value is subjective but only to things that have value in the first place..

Bitcoin can be traded between people. This fact alone gives it value.

Physical bitcoins have intrinsic value. How can something with intrinsic value be worth zero?

Your belief is your personal problem.

Regarding people that would rather die. Value of X is not based on wants of some people, but on the ability of a thing to provide utility to human beings/humans/Homo sapiens. 'Wish to die' does not belong to the definition of Homo sapiens.

Everything that is made up of atoms can be traded between people but this is not what gives value to things.

Again, you do not speak for all homo sapains. But is there a reason you skipped the fact that physical bitcoins have intrinsic value? Or are you just choosing to ignore that fact?

Everything is physical, just like the dot at the end of this sentence. But, I've already explained that value comes from utility and not physicality. I have no interest to respond to things I already disproved.

[fxsurfer]

You are going a it off-topic, but are still wrong.

Even being involved in pyramid schemes can be valuable, althought in criminal way. In that case valuable is position, in which You have joined and which allows You to scam those other people, who lose money. Those positions have very high value for criminals, who are masterminds and early joiners into scheme.

Same goes for BTC scheme. What is most valuable in this scheme, is position of early miners, when "mining" could have called accordingly only because the mechanism of process was similar. Thore were essentially free "game coins", which also were valued accordingly 0,01 USD etc.

Of course, for Satoshi and other early miners "BTC scheme" was very valuable. But bitcoin - symbol/number/byte that is connected to the name of John Doe is not valuable because of that. This byte was just used as means to transfer value from pocket of John Doe to the pockets of Satoshi and early miners. Numbers couldn't provide them utility, which is why they used BTC scheme to get that utility in things they can eat, drink, wear, drive, sit on, enter into, please the aesthetic senses, legally enforce(fiat money), etc. Worthless numbers are left to people like you, who are as a result, forced to find value in valuelessness, by using a series of irrational excuses.


Precicely and that is BTCs value for Satoshi and early miners!

Now, there is not just Satoshi and early miners, but a group of relatively early miners, then mid-time miners and so on... For each of them BTC scheme scammed some money, therefore being valueable same was as to early miners, just in less amount.

No, that is NOT BTCs value but manipulation's value. If you were tricked to give million dollars to a scammer who sold you an empty box because you were convinced it contains an expensive diamond, that does not mean that emptiness in the box has value. It just means you've been scammed. Or in other words, scam was the thing that had value, and not the subject of the scam (emptiness).

[dohh]

You are going a it off-topic, but are still wrong.

Even being involved in pyramid schemes can be valuable, althought in criminal way. In that case valuable is position, in which You have joined and which allows You to scam those other people, who lose money. Those positions have very high value for criminals, who are masterminds and early joiners into scheme.

Same goes for BTC scheme. What is most valuable in this scheme, is position of early miners, when "mining" could have called accordingly only because the mechanism of process was similar. Thore were essentially free "game coins", which also were valued accordingly 0,01 USD etc.

Of course, for Satoshi and other early miners "BTC scheme" was very valuable. But bitcoin - symbol/number/byte that is connected to the name of John Doe is not valuable because of that. This byte was just used as means to transfer value from pocket of John Doe to the pockets of Satoshi and early miners. Numbers couldn't provide them utility, which is why they used BTC scheme to get that utility in things they can eat, drink, wear, drive, sit on, enter into, please the aesthetic senses, legally enforce(fiat money), etc. Worthless numbers are left to people like you, who are as a result, forced to find value in valuelessness, by using a series of irrational excuses.


Precicely and that is BTCs value for Satoshi and early miners!

Now, there is not just Satoshi and early miners, but a group of relatively early miners, then mid-time miners and so on... For each of them BTC scheme scammed some money, therefore being valueable same was as to early miners, just in less amount.

No, that is NOT BTCs value but manipulation's value. If you were tricked to give million dollars to a scammer who sold you an empty box because you were convinced it contains an expensive diamond, that does not mean that emptiness in the box has value. It just means you've been scammed. Or in other words, scam was the thing that had value, and not the subject of the scam (emptiness).

Scamming object also has value according their scamming potential. Empty box with ALTCOIN logo on it and empty box with BTC logo on it have totally different scamming values, while BTC scams big time, many altcoins do very little.

[halfmil]

I don’t believe you responded to any of those points. But here is what I will tell you. The truth is multi layered and there are a lot of facts in life. You speak in half truths.

The truth is water is only a valuable utility to people that want to live. Some people would rather die then to do something they don’t want to do to get water. To these people water is valueless. Zero. Zilch.

So now you have agreed that value is subjective but only to things that have value in the first place..

Bitcoin can be traded between people. This fact alone gives it value.

Physical bitcoins have intrinsic value. How can something with intrinsic value be worth zero?

Your belief is your personal problem.

Regarding people that would rather die. Value of X is not based on wants of some people, but on the ability of a thing to provide utility to human beings/humans/Homo sapiens. 'Wish to die' does not belong to the definition of Homo sapiens.

Everything that is made up of atoms can be traded between people but this is not what gives value to things.

Again, you do not speak for all homo sapains. But is there a reason you skipped the fact that physical bitcoins have intrinsic value? Or are you just choosing to ignore that fact?

Everything is physical, just like the dot at the end of this sentence. But, I've already explained that value comes from utility and not physicality. I have no interest to respond to things I already disproved.

Wow that’s rich. You have not disproved that physical bitcoins don’t have intrinsic value. But this must have hit to close to home so I don’t blame you for giving up. You just lost the fight you picked.