Gold has intrinsic value. Bitcoin are just... bits.

Gold's "intrinsic" value is limited to electronics contact plating and a comparatively small ("one tech company" worth of revenue) global jewelry market.

Gold's perceived value may be higher, but that's only because it's perceived, incorrectly, to have "intrinsic" value.

Isn't money just bits too nowadays?

As far as I understand, Bitcoin is backed by energy and scarcity, much like gold: it requires significant energy to "mine" a Bitcoin, and it can't be easily duplicated, if at all. That's its intrinsic value, unlike fiat currencies that can be printed easily (correct me if I'm wrong).

I also believe that even gold has little intrinsic value, perhaps even less than steel. Ultimately, it's really a question of how valuable something is as a medium of exchange. Bitcoin is durable, portable, divisible, scarce, verifiable, and decentralized, which makes it a valuable form of currency. I suppose that's its exchange value.

> Bitcoin is durable, portable, divisible, scarce, verifiable, and decentralized, which makes it a valuable form of currency

I think for it to be a currency it has to be accepted for real world products? A currency is also useless if it fluctuates this much because you cannot set prices for anything.

By your logic stocks would be a currency?

A security is what it is at this point

Money is bits, but the government (depending on where you live it is different governments) says you can use it, and so it is backed by the law.

If that is good or bad is an open question.

Indeed, it must have legal value. Even so, some stores accept Bitcoin and Monero (thus making them money) but won’t accept USD in Europe or Euros in the US, so you can't use them despite those currencies having legal tender status.

So yes, whether Bitcoin is money or a security remains an open question.

>Bitcoin is backed by energy

Uh that energy is spent though, transformed into heat , you can't reverse all that hashing and have the computer emit electricity.

Isn't it the same for all mining activities, including gold? You typically spend a massive amount of energy digging and processing earth to recover a few grams of gold, and that energy isn't recoverable.

yeah but the gold exists.

Gold fell on Friday and recovered over the weekend. BTC certainly remains a more speculative asset than physical gold, but the comparison is not as unhinged as you make it sound.

Gold is the, uh, gold standard of safety bets and has run up lately to due comprehensive craziness around the world and especially in the US.

How is BTC not the exact opposite of gold? It has no fundamentals whatsoever, no uses outside its transactability, and is widely used to speculate.

> How is BTC not the exact opposite of gold?

If BTC is the exact opposite of gold, it follows that Eth, Ripple, USDC, etc are all more gold-like than BTC. I'd be interested to hear why you believe that to be true.

BTC is a coin with longer investments and does not fluctuate as much as other cryptocoins (by %). It has a known supply (past, present and future) and predictable mining rate. It has a known finite future supply cap.

To be clear i don't believe BTC is a perfect gold analog. But if you have to pick the "most gold-like" digital asset, it would make my short list.