Great essay. Your best one yet.
An Austrian economist would probably sympathize with much of what you’re getting at, but it'd be good to clarify a few things.
Seeing the market as computation metaphor is useful, but I'd hesitate to describe markets strictly in terms of “computing” solutions in a technical sense, since prices are not outputs of the calculation itself but social expressions of exchange under subjective value through private property. From this angle, markets don’t solve an optimization problem so much as discover information that could not exist prior to action itself.
Also, where you said that economics has nothing to do with monetary policy should be rephrased. Like an Austrian would agree that economics is fundamentally about intertemporal coordination, but would stress that monetary institutions/policy matter precisely because they distort or clarify time signals through interest rates, credit expansion, capital investment structure. So in that sense, monetary policy is one of the main ways temporal coordination is either achieved or corrupted. Monetary policy isn't something peripheral as it affects time preference.
Lastly, on scarcity, I would be cautious about saying it can be “overcome" (Overcoming scarcity is a handy praxeological definition for Jannah). Even in conditions of extreme abundance, scarcity is a structural feature of human action, as wants expand and the tradeoffs never disappear. Oh and can't forget opportunity cost. So maybe I'd just call it an era of "extreme abundance" rather than overcoming scarcity itself. That said, your treatment of Bitcoin as something more than “digital gold” especially as a novel way of binding time, which reminded me of Gigi's essay "Bitcoin is Time", is genuinely interesting to me. Even from economic perspective, there’s clearly something here that goes beyond conventional monetary categories and deserves further exploration.
