> they have no intrinsic value<p>It's funny how much weight is placed on this word "intrinsic", as if we need to penetrate down to some singular identity layer of a thing to be comfortable assigning it value as a store of anything.<p>Exactly what that layer is supposed to look like is always somehow described with gobs of words that easily map onto other things that people have already valued for millenia.<p>You might as well just ask, "is it popular with some people"? If the answer is yes, it's probably a carrier of human interest to some degree, regardless of whatever snooty value systems may be applied to that, so you can likely buy it low and sell it high with a slightly-educated squint at a moving average chart.<p>(I noticed that people really like to think they are good at assigning value to things, so perhaps this comes down to some core human fear...certainly the typical concern about future outcomes also applies, in which we learn that people have apparently never heard of contingency planning and calculated risk...both of which may be even more useful than intrinsic-whatever subjectivity)