It is really useful for some applications, and I think it is especially useful for keeping fiat money in check. Now, I can deflect from fiat (at some costs, obviously).
The "cryptocurrencies are really useful" argument is now equivalent to the "gold has intrinsic value" argument. Technically they are both right, but the current price is so out of line with the actual value generated by those use cases as to be basically irrelevant. Both derive the majority of their value from people purchasing it as an speculative investment.
Gold is (relatively) easy to store, transfer, hard to obtain, really limited supply -- the qualities that make commodity good money. Uselessness of gold is actually useful here -- transactions with it does not distort markets. Imagine if we used coffee beans as "gold" -- then changes in monetary velocity would impact consumers, who would be forced to stash it.
Sorry, the brevity of that comment apparently didn't convey my point well enough. Real estate is an example of what you theorized would happen with coffee beans. It is a useful resource that is also used for speculative investment. It is something everyone needs, but as a society we have decided its price should also always be increasing. This has a net negative impact on society.
Bitcoin existing doesn't stop people from speculatively investing in real estate, so I don't think people will just start speculating on coffee beans or something similar if Bitcoin goes away.
Would it be better if people poured loads of money into something useful as a speculative investment? Imagine if the price of, say, steel went up by a huge amount due to people hedging against currency. Or housing—I hear this has actually happened.
The problem isn't the resource that is being used for irritational speculative investment. It is that irrational speculative investment happening at all. And for the record, Bitcoin investment is much less rational than gold investment.
And do you think the people making those irrational speculative investments will just stop if one of their investment targets is removed? I suppose a few might, but are those few worth it?
Not completely, but to a certain extent, yes. Like that sibling comment stated, there are certain important qualities for a good speculative investment like being easy to store, transport, and hold. Remember the point early in the pandemic in which a barrel of oil actually had a negative price? That is because it was difficult and costly to actually have ownership over the speculative resource. Bitcoin being so easy to own and transport makes it a much more attractive speculative investment in comparison to gold, oil, or steel so more people participate in the speculation.
Most people on earth don't have the ability to just invest in traditional commodity markets as a hedge.
Most people on earth DO have a mobile device, which grants them permissionless and censorship resistant access to the bitcoin network. This access allows for an escape hatch against abusive regimes who debase their country's fiat currency.
You realize what that would entail? Imagine a horde of wallstreetbets people buying huge amounts of dry wheat, causing the price to go through the roof and/or wheat becoming unavailable in some areas. Or, when they sell, a bunch of farmers' revenues dropping and making them go bankrupt. You really want that? Isn't it better if the chaos is contained to goods that aren't really important?
I can't imagine why you would want to haha. I don't really want to own Apple, I just want price action to the upside. Owning shares in a commodity ETF is no less real than owning a bitcoin.
That's strange, how do you know it's real and you own it? With my bitcoin, I can verify that I received it and that no one except myself has access to that specific portion of the supply. And then I can even transact it whenever I like without the involvement of any custodian!
You can verify that you have a key that corresponds to a specific quantity of Bitcoin. What you cannot verify is how much you can exchange it for. This is no different than owning a share of a commodity ETF. Transacting via custodian has literally never once gotten in my way. Has it for you?
> What you cannot verify is how much you can exchange it for.
Yes the price of assets are decided in a free market. So what point are you making exactly? Clearly in every other aspect, bitcoin is superior. In fact, bitcoin is one of the only assets that can be traded in the most free market environments possible, next to cash.
> Transacting via custodian has literally never once gotten in my way. Has it for you?
Yes it has. And it has for hundreds of millions people around the world. I come from a country that's under heavy sanctions, banks will refuse to bank you or will shutdown your account for no apparent reason. You're marked as a risky client anywhere you go that touches money and have to put up with extra checks.
Whoever you bank with has never had outages? They've never kept funds on hold pending checks? You haven't had to chase up a every department because your wire transfer didn't arrive? The list goes on. If not then good for you, but you're in the absolute tiny minority.
Of course, but you are not actually owning those commodities, then. You are not buying them and this is the point -- with bitcoin you are really in control.