I think this gets the “incumbents” argument slightly wrong. The argument is not that Bitcoin is “valueless”, but that it is a purely speculative instrument with little to no intrinsic value.
It doesn’t seem to have a path towards becoming a global medium of exchange, and it would be a store of value in the same sense as other speculative instruments like baseball or pokemon cards.
The arise of a new speculative instrument would also _seem like_ Bitcoin today, so I think a little more proof is needed to claim what we are seeing is the rise of a new monetary system.
It doesn’t seem to have a path towards becoming a global medium of exchange, and it would be a store of value in the same sense as other speculative instruments like baseball or pokemon cards.
The arise of a new speculative instrument would also _seem like_ Bitcoin today, so I think a little more proof is needed to claim what we are seeing is the rise of a new monetary system.