As usual, this article on the benefits of the original Bitcoin conflates the ideas of ‘commodity’…
Michael Andrew Haines.
1

As usual, this article on the benefits of the original Bitcoin conflates the ideas of ‘commodity’ and ‘money’.
Commodities (like gold) have their own intrinsic value.
Money is simply information.
Contrary to the ideas behind Bitcoin, money works best when the token that represents it has no value itself.
Historically, money was (and remains) a ‘record of debt’, first transcribed on clay tablets and later as an amount (the face value) on metal coins (the token).

I have not conflated these things. Your definitions of commodity and money are not generally accepted. I also use the term “commodity money” which is well defined by George Selgin, you have no properly consulted my sources. Gold has historically been used both as a peoples money and a settlement unit amount nations. 
You are using money like “fiat”.
I don’t know why you would think your points are contrary to bitcoin, what is bitcoin’s non monetary use case?
Money can be many things and have many definitions. I wouldn’t be interested in arguing versus a framing and perspective you don’t admit exists.

There is such thing as commodity money, and commodity have historically been used as money.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.