There is no "unfair" way to distribute an asset that is equally available to anyone with interest in buying it. The whole premise is based on the distribution of coins among early adopters versus late-comers, which is an entirely different thing.
Those that risk their capital on an unproven idea deserve their rewards, you can't scream that its "unfair" that those who grasped what Bitcoin was about first got in ahead of the teeming masses. This dynamic plays out in many ways in other similar circumstances, whether its the first round of capital investment in a startup, or the savvy investor that sees the diamond-in-the-rough of a OTC "Pink Sheet" offering. You can't go back and tell these people risking their money isn't "fair".
The whole argument reduces to this: If you don't have foresight and experience, then you pay the price for being late and stupid.
And I wouldn't want it any other way....
Totally agree. There has never been anything keeping people from using BTC. (Excluding Russian law.) The people who bought early paid less, but also took on way more risk. It is very typical of any market to see a ratio of risk and reward. If you wait to buy some asset that has done well then it is not going to see as much growth, but may be more stable and less likely to fall apart. Or one could take on a risky asset with a small possibility of huge growth. Either bet could be part of a sensible strategy.