I've never been able to understand why anyone would regard a Bitcoin as having any value, since it is evidence of past (useless) work and energy expenditure with no value other than the creation of a Bitcoin.
Mind you, it is generally accepted that a Bitcoin is made valuable purely by its acceptability to Bitcoin participants as currency. ie it is completely 'faith-based'.
Do Not Throw Stones At This Notice comes to mind in terms of pointless circularity.
In respect of faith-based value - rather than value which derives from use value over time - a Bitcoin as a value token is not dissimilar to gold, of course, but at least gold has amenity value, being nice to look at for a few million years, and possessing some specialised uses.
There's an interesting fork of Bitcoin as well - Freicoin - which introduces Gesell's concept of 'money that rusts' (demurrage) in order to discourage hoarding and encourage spending.
Bitcoin's P2P architecture on the other hand? Now that is valuable: and I haven't even mentioned anonymity and Big Government.
For me, the challenge is to create a unit of account, platform, framework/protocol and generally acceptable instruments (currency) which combine credit, utility and trust.
I think that to do so is both completely necessary and achievable, and moreover represents what is now an implementable Adjacent Possible.
frontpaged by afew