Bounty for Bitcoin Animated Movie [won]

[FreeMoney]

Bitcoins are a commodity by almost any definition.

[1714546030]

1714546030

[kiba]

Bitcoins are a commodity by almost any definition.

According to laughing libertarians, they're not.

[bytemaster]

Bitcoins are certainty a commodity.  They are rare, and are valued at about $0.06.  

This distinction between "money" "currency" and what not is all linguistic masturbation.    All things are governed by supply, demand, and free trade exchange rates.  

People want bitcoins other people have bitcoins therefore they are traded.  People want FRN others have them.  Supply/demand.  

Certainly one may question the sanity of people who decide to store their wealth in something with potential for unlimited supply or fiat debasement.

For those who expect a hyperinflationary economic collapse, war, EMP, loss of grid power or internet then Bitcoin isn't the best "store of wealth".  

If we lived in a more stable world, then perhaps bitcoins would be a very good store of wealth.

For now the bitcoin commodity servers as a good temporary store of wealth and medium of exchange.  But these are just properties of a comodity that make it useful to use as a money.

My definition of money = "most marketable commodity" where the buy/sell spread and marketing costs are practically 0.  This makes it a suitable intermediary item in "barter" transactions.

[caveden]

"Hard money" is a commodity that is 1) durable 2) divisable and 3) difficult to fake and 4) difficult to produce.

So bitcoins are even harder money than gold is. They verify all conditions, and even better than gold. It's harder to fake, will become impossible to produce after reaching the 21 million limit, and it's more divisible.

[MoonShadow]

"Hard money" is a commodity that is 1) durable 2) divisable and 3) difficult to fake and 4) difficult to produce.

So bitcoins are even harder money than gold is. They verify all conditions, and even better than gold. It's harder to fake, will become impossible to produce after reaching the 21 million limit, and it's more divisible.

Bitcoins are no more a commodity than US Federal Reserve Notes are, and nor are they backed by any fixed commodity standard.

[MoonShadow]

Bitcoins are certainty a commodity.  They are rare, and are valued at about $0.06. 

This distinction between "money" "currency" and what not is all linguistic masturbation.    All things are governed by supply, demand, and free trade exchange rates.   

You have a right to your own opinions, but not your own facts.  It is impossible, by definition, for bitcoins to be a commodity.  A commodity requires a utility outside of the context of a medium of exchange or a store of value; beyond being simply a currency.  Not for you, personally, but for someone.  Historicly, gold and silver both have (and still do) have utility as jewlery.  Presently, silver has industrial utilities, and gold would also if it wasn't valued so much more than other alternatives.

Bitcoins can *never* have any utility beyond their use as a medium of exchange or a store of value; and a FRN or a Euro wouldn't even make decent toilet paper.

[kiba]

"Hard money" is a commodity that is 1) durable 2) divisable and 3) difficult to fake and 4) difficult to produce.

So bitcoins are even harder money than gold is. They verify all conditions, and even better than gold. It's harder to fake, will become impossible to produce after reaching the 21 million limit, and it's more divisible.

Bitcoins are no more a commodity than US Federal Reserve Notes are, and nor are they backed by any fixed commodity standard.

FAIL HARD.

Please provide an actual argument beyond your assertion.

[NewLibertyStandard]

It just depends on which definition you choose. Bitcoins are useful, can be produced and sold, so they're a commodity. Bitcoins are already processed, can't be produced outside of the Bitcoin specifications and can't be manufactured into something else for resale, so they're not a commodity.

[jimbobway]

Bitcoins are certainty a commodity.  They are rare, and are valued at about $0.06.  

This distinction between "money" "currency" and what not is all linguistic masturbation.    All things are governed by supply, demand, and free trade exchange rates.  

You have a right to your own opinions, but not your own facts.  It is impossible, by definition, for bitcoins to be a commodity.  A commodity requires a utility outside of the context of a medium of exchange or a store of value; beyond being simply a currency.  Not for you, personally, but for someone.  Historicly, gold and silver both have (and still do) have utility as jewlery.  Presently, silver has industrial utilities, and gold would also if it wasn't valued so much more than other alternatives.

Bitcoins can *never* have any utility beyond their use as a medium of exchange or a store of value; and a FRN or a Euro wouldn't even make decent toilet paper.

I can take an iPhone, write a bling-bling application that will show how many bitcoins I own.  I can then tie the iPhone to a rope necklace, wear it, and show off how many bitcoins I have.  Holla!  Jewelry of the future, baby!

[NewLibertyStandard]

The only way to prove you own bitcoins is to publish the coins' private keys. Please do write the program! Hahaha!

[jimbobway]

The only way to prove you own bitcoins is to publish the coins' private keys. Please do write the program! Hahaha!

It's all about the show.  Cubic zirconia vs diamonds viewing at arm's distance?  Same analogy.

[FreeMoney]

The only way to prove you own bitcoins is to publish the coins' private keys. Please do write the program! Hahaha!

The only way! Ha!

[caveden]

Bitcoins are no more a commodity than US Federal Reserve Notes are, and nor are they backed by any fixed commodity standard.

But the dollar is a commodity.
And, by the way, what backs gold?

[caveden]

You have a right to your own opinions, but not your own facts.  It is impossible, by definition, for bitcoins to be a commodity.  A commodity requires a utility outside of the context of a medium of exchange or a store of value;

A commodity is a good for which there is demand, but which is supplied without qualitative differentiation across a market. It is fungible, i.e. equivalent no matter who produces it.

It doesn't look that impossible to me.
This definition of yours by the way doesn't even make much sense, since the utility of something is entirely subjective.

Bitcoins can *never* have any utility beyond their use as a medium of exchange or a store of value; and a FRN or a Euro wouldn't even make decent toilet paper.

How can you make such a statement? How can you know which is the utility of bitcoins for other people? This is subjective.

And, anyway, it isn't the definition of commodity either.

[NewLibertyStandard]

Bitcoins absolutely are not a commodity according to the traditional business and financial definition. The word commodity is primarily a business and financial term, so that definition takes priority over y'all's loose definitions. Bitcoins are not a commodity. You can stretch the definition to make it fit, but it's like jamming a square peg through a round hole; only the special kid does it.

[caveden]

From your own link:

"The term also describes financial products, such as currency or stock and bond indexes."

[NewLibertyStandard]

From your own link:

"The term also describes financial products, such as currency or stock and bond indexes."

Square peg, round hole.

[mizerydearia]

I sent message to cyriak ( http://www.youtube.com/user/cyriak ) regarding producing a video.  If they were to do so, it would be most amazingly awesome I'm sure!

[MoonShadow]

Bitcoins are no more a commodity than US Federal Reserve Notes are, and nor are they backed by any fixed commodity standard.

But the dollar is a commodity.

No, it is not.  The US dollar is a fiat currency, and nothing more.

And, by the way, what backs gold?

Historicly the yellow metal was prized for it's beauty in jewelry.  In our modern world, there are many uses for it in industry for which it is ideal even though it is too expensive.  For example, lead is poisonous to humanity, but it's mass number makes it both a wonderful material for making ship ballasts and radiation shielding.  Gold has been used for both these things in the past, but only in very specific situations. 

[NewLibertyStandard]

Although gold is a commodity, gold coins are not a commodity. Electricity is a commodity and CPU cycles could be considered a commodity, but bitcoins are not. It's the same principle in both instances.