There doesn't need to be a loophole around #1, because Bitcoin does have a use value. That use value is derived from the software that forms the client as well as the network. Software represents organized work toward a goal, namely to create a logic machine that performs a desired function. In the case of Bitcoin, that function is to transfer value (not wealth, which is different) over vast distances at unmatched speed and for a very low cost. The kicker for bitcoin (the currency itself) is that bitcoins are required for this function, for no existing form of currency can cooperate with the Bitcoin client to this end. Adding confusion is the fact that, due to the nature of a decentralized currency, there can be no form of backing or peg. So the relative value of bitcoins verses existing currencies must float. Thus the chicken and egg problem then becomes, how does one get an initial relative value for bitcoins? It happens to be that said initial value was established when an early adopter, wishing to advance the currency, chose to offer some of his vast holdings in return for a pizza. He offered 10K BTC, and someone else decided that it was worth that to him. All of point #2 flows from this singular event, but the use value that those two traders saw in bitcoin wasn't in the pizza, but in the functions that the currency and the client together could perform. I.E. to move value across limitless distance. It is this function that no other prior currency on Earth, fiat or otherwise, could perform in an economicly competitive manner.
Hello,
It is not necessary justifying Bitcoins value looking at its underlaying infrastructure´s value. No matter the costs of the infrastructure if nobody uses bitcoins, because in that case the infrastructure is worthless unless you use it for something different (web servers or whatever...). Bitcoins are currency, and they were invented specifically for that, and they are valuable becuase they render monetary utility. Once a good renders utility, it is valuable, no matter wich kind of utility.
Also, I think there is no such a "chicken and egg" problem. The value of currency or money is discovered by the market, just as it is discovered for any other good. It happens whenever something new is invented or discovered.
Did you actually read my post? Or did you just read part of it and assume you understood it?
