Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 05:10:46 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 03:09:34 PM

Why not? Am I the one proclaiming all value is objective? I think not. You are the one arguing objective value doesn't exist. You seem to be the nutjob needing to justify your extreme characterization of the world, whether we are referring to human behavior or otherwise.. but then you are saying the world does not matter, except to the extent that humans value it?

It is not an extreme characterization. In fact, it is the very fundamental principle of sound economics. "Objective" adheres to impartiality, and is a reference for something that has properties that can be verified, regardless of opinions. The meter is an objective unit of measurement, because it refers to external, natural phenomena that occur regardless of perceptions.

But, value is not referring to anything external. It is defined only by the person's judgement. A bottle of water remains the same bottle, whether it is sitting on a desk or found on a deserted island. Yet, a person dying of thirst would clearly value it differently, depending on the circumstances.

For value to be objective, there would need to be a unit of measurement that is independable of human preference, but that contradicts the definition of value, as something is valuable only for someone and is not intrinsically for itself.

Also,

Quote from: https://mises.org/online-book/introduction-austrian-economics/4-subjective-theory-value

The subjectiveness of valuation rests in the nature of satisfaction--satisfaction is subjective and not open to numerical measurement. The extent to which a thing gives satisfaction is always personal. People derive satisfaction from different goods and services; that is, all people are not alike in terms of the types of things that please them. Experience also demonstrates that a person’s preferences vary from time to time. His ranking of alternative choices may undergo a reshuffling at any given moment. His scale of values may also be altered by deletions or additions.

I don't have any problem with the idea of subjective value or even conceding that an overwhelming majority of human action is motivated by subjective value, and my main contention is my own unwillingness to concede that 100% of value (and potentially inferably human action) is subjective value as both you and richie seem to be proclaiming. I don't claim to be a philosopher, but I do claim to object to a framing that all value is subjective as Richy_T asserted and you seem to be agreeing with...and perhaps it does not even matter the extent to which I disagree or am not ready, willing or able to argue my sense of things. Maybe I just don't like absolutes, especially when it comes to describing human action, preferences, behavior or even looking at the assessment of objects, ideas, services, behaviors, that humans interact. Sure, if we were talking about 2+2=4, then I am o.k. with accepting those kinds of absolutes.

Quote from: vapourminer on Today at 05:17:25 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 03:09:34 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on Today at 03:28:37 AM

Perhaps more importantly though, believing things have objective value often leads to very real errors in the evaluation of particular circumstances.

You believe that you have no errors if you completely evaluate every thing ONLY from the perspective of subjective value? I am not even denying the existence of subjective value, and I may even be willing to concede that a large portion of value (perhaps even an overwhelming majority) comes from various ways of considering subjective value, yet I am not willing to concede that 100% of value comes from subjective value... ..

but isnt bitcoin a prime example of a purely artificially priced thing in action? as a private key or tx is just a number.. no value on its own at all. and after all the btc price is.. the btc price. no distractions of some secondary value interfering with price discovery.

I am not willing to go that far in my own interpretation of what is bitcoin or the truth of bitcoin's math and potentially various abstract aspects of bitcoin's seeming beauty that coordinate the various actors within.. it is like saying is the free market anything beyond the expression of a bunch of subjective values networked together.. again.. I am not willing to go full subjective value on you guys and concede that..

Punchline: Never go full subjective value.

Maybe asking another question could be helpful (valuable?).

Was bitcoin invented or discovered? Surely the answer could be arguable, and not that I feel like arguing it beyond that it is not 100%.

And, no I don't mean to be coy in my dancing around my refusal to concede, since for sure there are a ton of subjective elements in bitcoin including various built in incentive systems, yet there are also likely various (woo woo) features that may well have value in themselves (whether bitcoin, human interactions or otherwise), even if we might be concluding that an overwhelming majority of how bitcoin gains its following and chasers of price revolves around subjective values, even mining incentives to seek profits, and relations including the building of various human-connected network effects (as outlined by Trace Mayer), and I am not claiming to be any kind of philosopher, even though I am objecting to going along with an absolute framework that all value is subjective, whether referring to bitcoin and/or other places in the world that purported value might be found, located, discovered and/or invented.

Quote from: cxtreenal on Today at 06:12:54 PM

https://x.com/BTC_Archive/status/1883876432621015222

I firmly believe this is possible given the institutional acceptance that will continue to grow in the future.
Standard Chartered has also realistically released their statements in the past.

If you are proclaiming that it is possible that BTC prices reach $200k this year, you come off as a wee bit bearish.