I think many of the similarities/associations you've outlined are more or less correct, but mostly 2nd order. Bitcoin's 1st order property is that it's great money, for all the typical reasons why something can be deemed a good money, including: scarcity, durability, recognizability, fungibility, portability, divisibility, etc... All of these add up to reducing the friction of exchange, and that's what money is all about. Bitcoin excels in that domain (friction of exchange reduction), and so, I think it can simply be called a "great money".
So, again, while I think many of the connections/similarities you've drawn to domain names have merit, they're dwarfed by bitcoin's excellent medium-of-exchange properties, and therefore if I had to pick one class of thing that bitcoin is, I'd easily say "currency".
Topic: Bitcoins are more like domain names than any other asset - page 2. (Read 4898 times)
It's a decent comparison. What you're describing is really an extension of basic supply and demand, not necessarily only related to what happened with .com domains. The lower something's price the more demand for that product there will be. Giving something with a fixed supply away for free (or nearly free) naturally attracts a ton of people's interest if that asset could eventually have any value.
So are valuable .com domain names.
We've been working on a program called The Bitcoin Phenomenon for SQ1.tv.
In my view, the closest analogue to bitcoin as an asset is .com domain names, not a currency. Let me explain:
At heart, bitcoin is a protocol. Its initial value was derived from people speculating about its future. Bitcoins were virtually free to mine at its origin. Today, it is considerably harder to create this asset, a bitcoin. Additionally, there is a strong network effect forming the value of bitcoin...the more people that use bitcoin or play in the bitcoin ecosystem, the more valuable bitcoin is as a protocol and the value of each individual bitcoin grows as result.
Back in 1993, .com domains were free. You could register any .com for free. And almost all were available. The next year, Netscape Navigator was launched. And people could see the potential of the commercial web. And a nominal charge was added for registering domains. For one reason or another, the .com standard resonated with both consumers and businesses. Dot-com became synonymous with the web. Over time, the aggregate value of .com domains went through the roof as .com was the commercial standard. The only distinction is that some domains have more value than others whereas each bitcoin has the same value.
Similar to the supply constraint of 21 million, the number of memorable, pronounceable dot-com domains is limited. To find an unregistered .com of any commercial value is difficult, but not impossible; this is similar to mining today. And to those that suggest the supply constraint of bitcoin will hold back its commercial adoption, it should be noted that the scarcity of viable .com domains did not inhibit the growth of the commercial web.
In my view, bitcoin speculation is very similar to domain name speculation from 1994-1997. Its value is entirely predicated on the wide-spread adoption of the protocol.
In my view, the closest analogue to bitcoin as an asset is .com domain names, not a currency. Let me explain:
At heart, bitcoin is a protocol. Its initial value was derived from people speculating about its future. Bitcoins were virtually free to mine at its origin. Today, it is considerably harder to create this asset, a bitcoin. Additionally, there is a strong network effect forming the value of bitcoin...the more people that use bitcoin or play in the bitcoin ecosystem, the more valuable bitcoin is as a protocol and the value of each individual bitcoin grows as result.
Back in 1993, .com domains were free. You could register any .com for free. And almost all were available. The next year, Netscape Navigator was launched. And people could see the potential of the commercial web. And a nominal charge was added for registering domains. For one reason or another, the .com standard resonated with both consumers and businesses. Dot-com became synonymous with the web. Over time, the aggregate value of .com domains went through the roof as .com was the commercial standard. The only distinction is that some domains have more value than others whereas each bitcoin has the same value.
Similar to the supply constraint of 21 million, the number of memorable, pronounceable dot-com domains is limited. To find an unregistered .com of any commercial value is difficult, but not impossible; this is similar to mining today. And to those that suggest the supply constraint of bitcoin will hold back its commercial adoption, it should be noted that the scarcity of viable .com domains did not inhibit the growth of the commercial web.
In my view, bitcoin speculation is very similar to domain name speculation from 1994-1997. Its value is entirely predicated on the wide-spread adoption of the protocol.
That's weird. Bitcoin is money.
We've been working on a program called The Bitcoin Phenomenon for SQ1.tv.
In my view, the closest analogue to bitcoin as an asset is .com domain names, not a currency. Let me explain:
At heart, bitcoin is a protocol. Its initial value was derived from people speculating about its future. Bitcoins were virtually free to mine at its origin. Today, it is considerably harder to create this asset, a bitcoin. Additionally, there is a strong network effect forming the value of bitcoin...the more people that use bitcoin or play in the bitcoin ecosystem, the more valuable bitcoin is as a protocol and the value of each individual bitcoin grows as result.
Back in 1993, .com domains were free. You could register any .com for free. And almost all were available. The next year, Netscape Navigator was launched. And people could see the potential of the commercial web. And a nominal charge was added for registering domains. For one reason or another, the .com standard resonated with both consumers and businesses. Dot-com became synonymous with the web. Over time, the aggregate value of .com domains went through the roof as .com was the commercial standard. The only distinction is that some domains have more value than others whereas each bitcoin has the same value.
Similar to the supply constraint of 21 million, the number of memorable, pronounceable dot-com domains is limited. To find an unregistered .com of any commercial value is difficult, but not impossible; this is similar to mining today. And to those that suggest the supply constraint of bitcoin will hold back its commercial adoption, it should be noted that the scarcity of viable .com domains did not inhibit the growth of the commercial web.
In my view, bitcoin speculation is very similar to domain name speculation from 1994-1997. Its value is entirely predicated on the wide-spread adoption of the protocol.
In my view, the closest analogue to bitcoin as an asset is .com domain names, not a currency. Let me explain:
At heart, bitcoin is a protocol. Its initial value was derived from people speculating about its future. Bitcoins were virtually free to mine at its origin. Today, it is considerably harder to create this asset, a bitcoin. Additionally, there is a strong network effect forming the value of bitcoin...the more people that use bitcoin or play in the bitcoin ecosystem, the more valuable bitcoin is as a protocol and the value of each individual bitcoin grows as result.
Back in 1993, .com domains were free. You could register any .com for free. And almost all were available. The next year, Netscape Navigator was launched. And people could see the potential of the commercial web. And a nominal charge was added for registering domains. For one reason or another, the .com standard resonated with both consumers and businesses. Dot-com became synonymous with the web. Over time, the aggregate value of .com domains went through the roof as .com was the commercial standard. The only distinction is that some domains have more value than others whereas each bitcoin has the same value.
Similar to the supply constraint of 21 million, the number of memorable, pronounceable dot-com domains is limited. To find an unregistered .com of any commercial value is difficult, but not impossible; this is similar to mining today. And to those that suggest the supply constraint of bitcoin will hold back its commercial adoption, it should be noted that the scarcity of viable .com domains did not inhibit the growth of the commercial web.
In my view, bitcoin speculation is very similar to domain name speculation from 1994-1997. Its value is entirely predicated on the wide-spread adoption of the protocol.
Jump to: