pull down to refresh
I dunno... there's at least no demonstrated sense that there was a "right value" (since nobody bought or sold as far as we know). to quote Mises, pre-Pizza guy they're all "grasping in the dark."
Yes, Satoshi could send Hal 10 BTC but that doesn't do anything, and its value is still zero.
update: ah, wait, you're saying the burnt watts and hardware etc is an implicit price?
And time spent is an implicit wage. Yes, exactly.
too shallow, too weak. Opportunity cost in kind doesn't cut it as far as I can tell
Compared to what? We're just talking about finding a vague jumping off point.
These guys had to make an enormous number of choices, even before Pizza Day.
If they had been 100% confident that bitcoin would become the global monetary standard within say 50 years, they would have invested way more resources than they did. If they thought it had no chance, they would have invested much less.
Then, when it came time to buy some 'za, they had a vague sense of how much their bitcoin had cost them and probably tried to get the pizza somewhere around that price.
"some 'za"??
my lord, I need to hang out with Gen Z more
somewhat believable... but then the regression theorem is stupidly weak. Just any odd little early estimation would work, here are some sticks, bro; I'll trade them for a bubble gum!
It's necessarily weak because value's subjective. Who's to judge what's sufficient?
Cannot be the first time that's brought up wrt Regression Theorem
The reason I kept stressing the pre-Pizza activity in my comments is that I believe it's actually there that we find the initial value estimates.
Why invest that amount of time, those watts of power, and the specific computing hardware that was used, for the amount of bitcoin produced by them? Why not 100x more or less?
There was some sense of what the right value was and that sense informed the first commercial exchange, which gave us our first bitcoin-priced transaction.