I'd argue the service it provided was a free option, it was a ledger/security of who had that option. People reading the whitepaper assigned value to that optionality.

the network didn't provide a service when the price was zero/undetermined

denlillaapan

What was Bitcoin's use-value before it was money?

This framing tends to overlook service value in favor of good value. It's evident that the network provides a service, and all shitcoins are an effort to compete for that service of being a ledger. The ledger is also a form of security, security is also a service. Bitcoin may not be a product like a basket of eggs, but a service that makes sure no one can steal or kill your chickens has some value you'd trade eggs for.

Been plenty of threads lately in which we can conclude Mises was a clown on par or greater than Marx...

Rothbard too would take issue with Bitcoin, because of his clown stipulation that money be "sufficiently" divisible. Most of the cope in Bitcoin about adoption, MoE, fake L2's etc... is because its not 

Bitcoin simply does not divide enough for any meaningful number of people to use it as a day-to-day currency, it can only ever scale as collateral, which is far more important.

bitcoin

econ

Money is a language

Scoresby

> What was Bitcoin's use-value before it was money?

This framing tends to overlook service value in favor of good value. It's evident that the network provides a service, and all shitcoins are an effort to compete for that service of being a ledger. The ledger is also a form of security, security is also a service. Bitcoin may not be a product like a basket of eggs, but a service that makes sure no one can steal or kill your chickens has some value you'd trade eggs for.

> Rothbard, Mises

Been plenty of threads lately in which we can conclude Mises was a clown on par or greater than Marx... 

Rothbard too would take issue with Bitcoin, because of his clown stipulation that money be "sufficiently" divisible. Most of the cope in Bitcoin about adoption, MoE, fake L2's etc... is because its not *sufficiently* divisible for those use-cases. 

Bitcoin simply does not divide enough for any meaningful number of people to use it as a day-to-day currency, it can only ever scale as collateral, which is far more important.