Commodity - standardized material (commonly defined as raw material but clearly that's inaccurate as gasoline is not raw, agricultural products are not raw)
What do you mean by "real" that can encompass the non-physical?
Discussion
As in I know this is an actual and precise fraction of all bitcoin on the one and only bitcoin network, that no one can steal or diminish my share given the relevant assumptions hold true (like seeds were generated with the appropriate amount of entropy, and I maintain physical custody of my keys at all times). By contrast, the same cannot be said for any other digital item unless your assumption is that the trusted can be trusted.
So when I say my golf clubs are real, you would accept that because they're physical? But for digital "things" we need a whole other definition about the process used to create them?
Huh, damn I should lead with that next time I'm debating a shitcoiner, "how do you define when a digital item is real?".
I think that's an excellent question, if a digital item was to be considered real then we certainly would need a different definition than a physical item where you can touch it. So could a digital item be considered real in the first place? Is it worth creating a definition of realness for something that isn't possible? This really is the heart of what bitcoin is intended to represent, the very first (and foreseeable only) instantiation of digital scarcity, could that be extended to a new definition of realness fit for the digital realm? I think so, but I'll have to spend some time tonight thinking about the metaphysics of what it means for something to be real.
How do you define if something is real? The golf club is real, and the obvious reasoning is that you can touch it, but is that sufficient? It could be made of the wrong material and be totally deficient as a golf club, a nice bottle of wine or a famous painting could always be a forgary. A video of a person online can be real, it is a real video, and just like a physical object it could be a forgery. At any rate, I am inclined to think a things realness can only be determined subjectively. What about you? Even if bitcoin is real though, that casts a wide spread of what is considered real, so I understand this isn't immediately a justification that bitcoin is a commodity.
There's a difference between real (vs imaginary or theoretical) and genuine (vs imitation), although we do often use the term "real" to cover both
A real golf club vs a genuine tiger woods PGA winning golf club, alright. Would genuine be an abstraction built on real, or can something genuine also not be real ie "bitcoin is genuine but not real"?