"Intrinsic" value is a faulty concept. It's always the case that humans value something based on its usefulness for a specific purpose. The value is not an inherent property of something but a reflection of people's demand for it. Similarly, something only needs to be "backed" by something else if it is missing the properties that people value. - https://casebitcoin.com/critiq...

There are 60+ years of goldâ(TM)s annual production supply estimated to be available in various forms around the world. And thatâ(TM)s more like 500 years worth of industrial-only supply, factoring out jewelry and store-of-value demand. Therefore, goldâ(TM)s supply/demand balance to support a high price requires the ongoing perception of gold as an attractive way to store and display wealth, which is somewhat subjective. Based on the industrial-only demand, there is a ton of excess supply and prices would be way lower. - https://www.lynalden.com/bitco...

Bitcoin makes the development of cheap reliable sources of electricity, anywhere in the world, very rewarding. This financial reward in turn leads to growing investment in capital infrastructure for cheap energy sources, which leads to increased energy production, and decreased cost. - The Fiat Standard

Accelerating cybercrime incidents have demonstrated how challenging software security is when people donâ(TM)t have the ability to impose physical constraints. We have discussed how itâ(TM)s impossible to logically constrain something against the exploitation of logic, whereas it's easy to physically constrain something against the exploitation of logic (simply make it impossible to justify the physical cost of exploiting logic). Softwar - A Novel Theory On Power Projection, Jason P. Lowery

Bitcoin: Addressing the Ponzi Scheme Characterization

The broadest definition of a Ponzi scheme refers to any system that must continually keep operating to remain functional, or that has frictional costs.

Bitcoin doesnâ(TM)t really meet this broader definition of a Ponzi scheme any more than the gold market, the global fiat banking system, or less liquid markets like fine art, fine wine, collectable cars, or beachfront property. In other words, if your definition of something is so broad that it includes every non-cashflow store of value, you need a better definition.

All of these scarce items have some sort of utility in addition to their store-of-value properties. Gold and art let you enjoy and display visual beauty. Wine lets you enjoy and display gustatory beauty. Collectable cars and beachfront homes let you enjoy and display visual and tactile beauty. Bitcoin lets you make domestic and international settlement payments with no direct mechanism to be blocked by any third party, giving the user unrivaled financial mobility.

Those scarce objects hold their value or increase over time, and investors are fine with paying small frictional costs as a percentage of their investment, as an alternative to holding fiat cash that degrades in value over time.

Yes, Bitcoin requires ongoing operation and must reach a significant market capitalization for the network to become sustainable, but I think thatâ(TM)s best viewed as technological disruption, and investors should price it based on their view of the probability of it succeeding or failing. Itâ(TM)s a network effect that competes with existing network effects; especially the global banking system. And ironically, the global banking system displays more Ponzi characteristics than the others on this list.

Quantum computers could one day crack Bitcoins encryption, but its more likely cryptography will outwit new generations of supercomputers.