I’d say that’s worth acknowledging as a real utility but I’d push back even further and say that assuming it is “backed by something” is a category error. you only ask what it’s backed by if you don’t understand what you are talking about.
Discussion
I think it's a fair question to ask about the non monetary use cases. Without a clear explanation of what those are, people have a hard time believing that it's value won't simply collapse at some point.
Asking what it's "backed by" may not be the best phrasing, but there is a well posed question hiding in there.
sure, but only because they believe chartalist propaganda and have never actually thought about it. the only way to well-pose the question you are referring to would be something like: “how can this be different to what I am used to?”, which I think answers itself for the sufficiently intellectually curious. people who have a hard time believing its value won’t collapse will end up buying it at exactly the price they deserve.
I think you miss my goal. I am not trying to win argument with someone like Peter Schiff (who argues in bad faith), I am trying to help someone who argues in good faith but doesnt know much about bitcoin get past an obvious tripping point which otherwise shuts down their curiousity. Lots of people have trouble understanding why Bitcoin should have value given that no authority is backing it with an obvious commodity like gold.
And the timestamp server use case is a pretty fascinating use case to think about. It proves who knew (or agreed to) what when. This is a bottleneck of the legal / financial system, which makes some projects too difficult to coordinate.
The timestamp server function of Bitcoin removes this bottleneck, and may amplify the effectiveness of the legal/financial system to fund projects that would have been unthinkable before.
I get the goal, I’m just wary of this tactic. it seems like a cop-out of addressing the real issue by distracting them with something that is coincidentally also true but pretty much completely besides the point.
it’s like calling bitcoin a decentralised clock. it’s fun to play around with the idea if you are already totally onboard, but if that’s your opening gambit to convince a noob, you’re gonna end up in completely pointless discussions about what the total addressable market for clocks is.