[matt_wulfeck]

People have been desiring gold for longer than documented history. It's beautiful to look at. It has inherent value, which is evident in the fact of it's desirable beauty and long history.

Even in worst case scenario that it's comparable in value to dull, metallic gray Rhenium for its industrial applications: $42 an ounce is better than BTC's worst case $0. You'll always be able to exchange gold for bread.

[wyager]

> People have been desiring gold for longer than documented history.

Yes, it's been around longer than Bitcoin. Not really sure what you're trying to indicate there.

> It's beautiful to look at.

Which is responsible for a very small fraction of its value. Most gold is not used in jewelry.

> It has inherent value

There is no such thing as "inherent value". Humans assign value to things. Most of the reasons that humans assign a high value to gold (fungibility, divisibility, unforgeability) also apply to Bitcoin, only more so.

[matt_wulfeck]

I find a lot of engineers approach this topic so objectively. "Beautiful to look at? Pfffah! That doesn't compute, therefore it's incorrect."

Here's some additional benefits of gold:

* gold requires minimal knowledge to protect. To steal it you have to physically break into their home. They may be armed and they may kill you in the process. (My father can't protect his computer to save his life, but Lord save the poor soul who breaks into his home!)

* it's historically been very easy to trade gold for food.

* gold is worn on the body to show status and to look good. (Of course a software engineer is above such lofty extravagances which simply don't make sense)

* gold has industrial applications.

* you can look at gold and hold it in your hand. It's quite shiny and surprisingly shiny.

None of these things apply to BTC. Gold has inherent value because people inherently want it. Isn't 10,000 years of people digging it out of the ground evidence of that?

[wyager]

Either you didn't comprehend what I said, or you're intentionally being obtuse; I love the aesthetics of gold as much as anyone, but that simply does not account for the price of gold from an economic perspective. The vast majority of gold is sitting around in vaults, not being looked at by its owners.

> gold requires minimal knowledge to protect.

That's true, but you also can't protect it very well. Governments have a bad tendency to take people's gold away at certain times (even the US has done it before), and good luck protecting against that. It's not exactly hard for standard-issue thieves to get away with either. Bitcoin may take slightly more effort to protect, but you get a lot more for your effort.

> it's historically been very easy to trade gold for food.

You're just re-stating the fact that it has value.

> gold is worn on the body to show status and to look good.

Yes, this is one use of gold, as I already mentioned, and as I also already mentioned, this only accounts for a small fraction of gold's value.

> gold has industrial applications.

While true, this again is a very small market compared to the use of gold as a value store.

> you can look at gold and hold it in your hand.

That's true, and convenient, but hardly a necessary feature of a store of value. I can't hold in my hand the money in my bank account or my copper holdings. I still value them.

> It's quite shiny and surprisingly shiny.

OK, I think you have a repetition problem.

> None of these things apply to BTC.

And none of them are particularly relevant.

> Gold has inherent value because people inherently want it.

People don't "inherently" want it any more than they inherently want rubidium. It's just a metal; and yet, due to a confluence of circumstances and the network effect, it's subjectively very valuable for pretty much everyone.

> 10,000 years of people digging it out of the ground

You're repeating the fact that gold has been around for a long time.