Yes, much more money is needed to move the price from $100 to $1000 than it is to move from $1 to $10, but you forget that the growth of users grows exponentially as well.
And with more users, comes more money.
That's the real brute of a task. Despite all the wonderfulness I can't see much evidence of a huge upswell of users. It's pootling along nicely but a powerful rise needs more than a pootle.
that's probably because of the 18 month long blocksize debate which is still going on.
once that debate is settled, people should regain confidence.
I hate to repeat myself, but this thing is one of the most often issues misunderstood in this forum. it is a completely different ball game to grow your share from $.01 to $1, than from $100 to $10k although it is 100 fold growth each time. The scaling effect is something people completely forget about.
and here you are wrong again.
Yes, much more money is needed to move the price from $100 to $1000 than it is to move from $1 to $10, but you forget that the growth of users grows exponentially as well.
And with more users, comes more money.
It is not that easy. It seems you are yet another one who forgets how really exponential function works. Exponential growths in nature are not sustainable in the long run. Take any example you want and you will see that at some stage you run out of resources to sustain the exponential run (e.g., bacterias are growing exponentialy, or nearly that fast, as long as there is enough food to sustain their colony). I really recommend watching TEDTalks video on exponential function, to understand how fast it grows and how difficult is to keep its pace.
Same law applies to Bitcoin. At one stage you run out of new people bringing new money to keep the things going.
I'm an engineer, you don't need to teach me about exponential functions.
But maybe you could learn something from these charts.
This is what growth looks like (multiple examples so it's not just a fluke).
it's called rogers bell curvehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_adoption_life_cycle
Now apply Metcalfes law to the exponential increase in users
and the result is something like this:
or this
of course, it can't go on forever, so it will stop somewhere (when it reaches saturation)If we can just solve the ongoing debate, we can work on getting more users to adopt bitcoin (of course, we need to make room on the chain first, instead of keeping the blocksize limited to 1MB)
With the next influx of new users (once the blocksize debate is finally settled after more than 18 months) we will see another one like that. It's inevitable.
If bitcoin gains more users than it currently has, the only way to do it is like it has done before. History and math have proven it time and time again.
You know the definition of insanity right? Expecting different results from the same procedure?
Well guess what, you are expecting different results from the same procedure.