the silly thing is..

now even blackhatcoiner has turned into copying antithesis flip flop of ignorance..

when asking about the value(economic) and values(features and utility) of bitcoin
        i give examples of utility and features (values)
    but then the question becomes 'but its just a number made of nothing with no cost...' (value)
        so then i explain the cost of the creation(value)
    but then question flips to but the cost is not explaining the utility.. (values)
repeat infinity loop


funny part is that both antithesis and blackhatcoiner are thinking that bitcoin has not value. both thinking its just 2 people agreeing on a medium and setting some randomly chosen number of value to assign it. ignoring the acquisition value of the holder and his loss if utility values by giving it up as his bases of him setting up his sell value.
EG if its very complicated to acquire it again in the future. im less likely to give it up in a sell or swap for goods. thus i will only sell/swap for goods if conditions are right to account for the utility value i might lose by no longer having it.
EG i wont buy a house because although a house appreciates in value every 10 years bitcoin appreciates in value in 4 years.
EG i can sell the same house in 10 years. but trying to get the same amount of btc in 10 years would require alot more expense, effort to get back to same state as 10 years prior. so id rather keep the btc until i decide i no longer have use of it
.
the buyer can see how easy/hard it is to acquire(mining, market, offering labour, produce) and decide how much premium value its worth to acquire if its harder to acquire by other means
EG a buyer might pay a premium on 'local bitcoins' because he can acquire it easier without kyc.
EG a buyer might pay a premium on the market because its faster and less of a headache than trying to mine

its not 2 people dipping their hand into a hat and playing a raffle of random numbers to find an agreed price. there is more to the decision of value

as for saying that banks have security to give $10 bank note for $10 bank note. its not an insurance against fire, theft, loss.
burn a bank note and see if a bank will reimburse you,, they wont. they have no insurance or liability to protect you in that way.
all you get a a crisp bank note if you hand them a crumpled but complete bank note. and they can charge you for it.
thats all you get

the problem with their theory that bitcoin does not have this same promise.. is that bitcoin does. thats how payment systems work.. input output contract of a transaction is the promise of the swap of one utxo for another utxo

banks and bitcoin do not promise they will exchange a bank note or btc for a fixed bread loaf value.

they just take a unit and give you a unit of the same form. thats not fixed value security with bank fiat because if you held a bank note from 2009 (5 bread loaf value) you wont get 5 bread loaves for it now.
banks have no security against inflation, no fixed value promise.

however bitcoin has proven that bitcoin from 2009 are worth more now(deflation)

value is more secure in bitcoin then it is with fiat