It surprise me the ease to use the term “intrinsic value” when is totally misleading. Ignoring how close that is from the Marxian “Labor theory of value”. There’s no such thing as intrinsic value, value is always subjective and you’re supposed to have learned that from Mises.
https://forum.freecapitalists.org/t/bitcoins-prove-mengerian-account-of-money-creation/21195/11
People accept money because they want to exchange it for other goods and services. The price of gold would be much lower if it were completely demonetized (gold is still a functioning money despite what some peole may think), because it would depend only on its properties as industrial commodity. Gold is money because of its qualities as money not because it’s shinny or a good conductor.
The first two sentences are correct, of course. [In fact they are taken from Mises.] But the third sentence does not follow from the first two, and indeed is a huge boo boo. The article on my blog called Bitcoin Takes a Beating explains why..
In fact, if you campare both monies only AS MONEY (ignoring the unimportant fact that gold-money can be “converted” into commodity-gold), it turns out that bitcoin is a superior form of money over gold. The value of bitcoin comes from its properties as money and it doesn’t need anything else.
Mises wrote extensively to disprove exactly what you just wrote. See my aforementioned article.