...
Actually, I am not sure he is just trolling. He has a solid, veeeery theoretical point. Imo, we are just abstractly, in theory, talking about "value" in general and bitcoin. In practice this debate is actually quite meaningless. It is still imo interesting debate.
I know OP from his other threads. Sometimes he is thought-provoking, I'll give him that, but usually he would just waffle around good old "bitcoin is worthless because it has no intrinsic value" rhetoric, acting like he has come up with something new.
In this thread he attempts to re-define the meaning of the word "value" to fit his narrative. I don't think there's a single country in the world that would allow you not to pay taxes on otherwise taxable income just because you take bitcoin as a payment, or allow you to hide your wealth in bitcoin from wife you're divorcing - because it has no value, right?
Any sensible person would rather adjust his definitions to be compatible with the rest of the world - but that wouldn't earn him 5 pages of replies.
But what does he get with the 5-6 pages of replies on his thread? His inner satisfactory and that's it?
His ability to provoke is quite something and this is also art. This thread is the proof. And if it is hard to debate him (even for wrong reasons) he probably is a bit intelligent person? At least a bit?
At the end of the day this thread is quite retarded...
P.S.: I don't know why OP stopped replying my posts...