# Last edited on 2014-02-04 21:34:38 by stolfilocal Subject: Re: Bitcoin email from user "Jorge Stolfi" From: "Gideon Greenspan" Date: Mon, February 3, 2014 4:59 pm To: "Jorge Stolfi" Hi Jorge, I'm afraid I think having a piece of information embedded in the blockchain can indeed be considered as having some concrete intrinsic value. I am not talking about just a bitcoin transaction but about the extra information that can be attached to it (see OP_RETURN-based provably prunable outputs coming in bitcoin 0.9). Even if bitcoin withers and dies, I think it's fair to assume that an identical version of the blockchain up the problematic point will exist in many thousands of copies all around the world for decades to come. So there will be a way to objectively prove that the embedded piece of information existed at a certain point in time. If this embedded piece of information is a (say) SHA-512 hash of an important document, that means you can objectively prove that this document existed at a certain point in time. So the blockchain can be used as a kind of decentralized notarization service and bitcoin is the currency that one needs to use this service. Best regards, Gideon > Dear Gidgreen, one cannot count "slots in the blockchain" as > "assets". > > A share of any company, too, is a slot in the list of its shares. > Like a bitcoin, that slot has a market value and an owner, can be > traded, can be used as a store of value or means of payment, cannot > be stolen of double-spent, etc. But those things do not make it an > "asset". > > Bitcoins differ from shares of a make-believe corporation (one that > has no capital, no dividends or assets, no products and no customers) > only in that their shares are traded in a more efficient market > (global, distributed, zero-fee, etc.) than NYSE. > > But one cannot count the Bitcoin Network as an asset, either. It > would be like a company claiming NYSE and the SEC as its assets, > because they make trade in the company's stock viable and > trustworthy, and give it value. > > An asset is something that can be auctioned when the company is > liquidated, with its proceeds (minus debts) distributed to > shareholders. Bitcoin being liquidated means that the blockchain > stops being maintained. In that case, there is nothing to auction, > and nothing will be paid to the people who happen to own Bitcoins at > the time. > > So please remove that item from the "myths" page. It is not a myth. > People who buy Bitcoins must be fully aware that they are *not* > buying a share of the Network, but just a "stock" with no backing > assets, whose market value comes *only* from speculation and from its > use as a currency; and that Bitcoins will lose *all* their value if > and when they stop being used for this purpose.