Quote from: franky1 on September 05, 2022, 12:05:39 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 05, 2022, 11:54:48 AM

Quote from: PSCQQSCQQP on August 30, 2022, 11:02:47 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n41GPPhLkhI&t=30s

Keeping in mind the most important factor, without gold and silver, all electronic equipment wouldn't exist = bitcoin would not exist. Computers, phones, tv's, etc ALL require silver and gold to be manufactured.

Ser, read the Origins of Money by Nick Szabo, https://nakamotoinstitute.org/shelling-out/

I believe that proves the fact that it DOESN'T MATTER if the Store of Value asset is a metal, pieces of glass, or a SHELL if the social conensus was formed that the Store of Value asset is valuable, or not. It can be debated that Bitcoin would have been worth close to ZERO if it wasn't adopted by the drug dealers of the Dark Markets. But it was, and it has censorship-resistance components that they need which made it valuable for them, and if it was valuable for them, the value surged when many more of them adopted it, and when the value surged, it also has become valuable to US.

social consensus of money is about agreeing on a medium of exchange (not store of value)
that medium can be twigs, shells, pebbles, gold, paper, or crypto

The history as described by the research of Nick Szabo tells it differently, or some of it. The "assets" that were used as Medium of Exchange were collectibles, and because they were Stores of Value, they became the preferred Medium of Exchange. Because how could there be a social consensus develop around an "asset" to be a Medium of Exchange if the asset itself is not a Store of Value? Why would I trade my drugs with you if your Medium of Exchange is a common rock? If the rock has a Store of Value component, like a diamond, we can talk.