[onlyrealcuzzo]

People paid a lot of money for Enron stock before it exploded. Did that mean it was worth $70B the day before it exploded and suddenly it was worth nothing when people found out it was actually all a fraud?

Enron wasn't actually producing any value. Neither are self-replicating Byzantine fault tolerant systems.

Anything they can do can be done hundreds of orders of magnitude more efficiently. And nothing they are doing /requires/ the inefficiencies.

I mean, obviously people at Enron were doing /something/ in the same way Bitcoin is. And obviously investors were paying a lot of money for that at one point and then stopped paying for it when it became clear that /something/ was mostly fraud.

[xpe]

There are some pitfalls in comparing a particular stock (e.g. Enron) against a class of cash-like assets (e.g. Bitcoin).

If you want to make the comparison, perhaps you could lay out your logic?

So far, I haven't found a clear, direct, fundamental argument in your comments. I see some loosely related examples and some rhetorical questions. I am interested in your justification and terminology.

[xpe]

Market capitalization varies over time, sometimes quite rapidly, because it (partly) depends on human perception.

Am I detecting some conceptual discomfort with how market valuations work? You wouldn't be the first.

[xpe]

What is your definition of value / worth, as used above?

I can see that it is not market capitalization.