It is really useful for some applications, and I think it is especially useful for keeping fiat money in check. Now, I can deflect from fiat (at some costs, obviously).
Bitcoin existing doesn't stop people from speculatively investing in real estate, so I don't think people will just start speculating on coffee beans or something similar if Bitcoin goes away.
Most people on earth DO have a mobile device, which grants them permissionless and censorship resistant access to the bitcoin network. This access allows for an escape hatch against abusive regimes who debase their country's fiat currency.
Commodities don't have a fixed supply, they are not transportable, you can't actually own them. You can't verify them. You can't transact them easily.
Real and economically useful, bitcoin or commodities. which is which?
Commodities are the ones that can be both real and economically useful, to answer your question.
It's raining right now where I am. The roof of my house is keeping me dry. Can a bitcoin do the same?
Yes the price of assets are decided in a free market. So what point are you making exactly? Clearly in every other aspect, bitcoin is superior. In fact, bitcoin is one of the only assets that can be traded in the most free market environments possible, next to cash.
> Transacting via custodian has literally never once gotten in my way. Has it for you?
Yes it has. And it has for hundreds of millions people around the world. I come from a country that's under heavy sanctions, banks will refuse to bank you or will shutdown your account for no apparent reason. You're marked as a risky client anywhere you go that touches money and have to put up with extra checks.
Whoever you bank with has never had outages? They've never kept funds on hold pending checks? You haven't had to chase up a every department because your wire transfer didn't arrive? The list goes on. If not then good for you, but you're in the absolute tiny minority.