In attempting to apply the Regression Theorem to Bitcoin one may postulate that Bitcoin began as a "collectible", arising from interest by monetary theorists. The collectible obtained original use value due to their personal preferences. It was then bartered as a consequence of this value, transitioning to a medium of exchange based on the memory of barter value.

This appears consistent with the theorem, which argues that all money must originate from a commodity that obtains barter and then monetary exchange value. Yet if commodity value can arise from potential as money then the theorem is tautological, implying nothing more than money is money.

Now, the regression theorem aims at interpreting the first emergence of a monetary demand for a good which previously had been demanded exclusively for industrial purposes as influenced by the exchange value that was ascribed to it at this moment on account of its nonmonetary services only.

Ludwig von Mises: Human Action

The postulate takes advantage of colloquial ambiguity in the word "commodity", despite the explicit reference to "industrial" use value in the theorem itself. If anything can be a commodity then the Regression Theorem would imply, contrary to its assertion, that anything can be money.

In economics, a commodity is an economic good or service that has full or substantial fungibility: that is, the market treats instances of the good as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them. [...]

Most commodities are raw materials, basic resources, agricultural, or mining products, such as iron ore, sugar, or grains like rice and wheat. Commodities can also be mass-produced unspecialized products such as chemicals and computer memory.

Wikipedia: Commodity

The Regression Theorem uses "commodity" to distinguish money from something with no original use value. If it intends that anything is a commodity, it is tautological, and otherwise the postulate is a misrepresentation of the theorem.