There's a bit of a slight of hand in the final sentence. I'd say the intent there is to dismiss things like personal meme coins.
Bitcoin can't "be issued by just anybody", as in arbitrarily at their whim. It can only be issued under very strict constraints, which makes it more like a commodity money.
I actually do think the regression theorem is right (at least for things that persist as money) and that it does show how money must have emerged (deduction as opposed to induction), but also that it's very weak because the pre-money value can be literally anything. Nothing about the Regression Theorem says that money had to emerge from something that had been valued for its widespread practical uses.
There's a bit of a slight of hand in the final sentence. I'd say the intent there is to dismiss things like personal meme coins.
Bitcoin can't "be issued by just anybody", as in arbitrarily at their whim. It can only be issued under very strict constraints, which makes it more like a commodity money.
I actually do think the regression theorem is right (at least for things that persist as money) and that it does show how money must have emerged (deduction as opposed to induction), but also that it's very weak because the pre-money value can be literally anything. Nothing about the Regression Theorem says that money had to emerge from something that had been valued for its widespread practical uses.