To me, it's interesting as another example of faddish human behavior. It is more psychological than something that could be explained by the computer science department.
Faddish human behavior/psychology is driving the market; it's true to an extent.
The computer science department part is a bit confusing. Couple of his past statements:
Then, we have a new form of money that ... sounds extremely revolutionary and involves a very clever use of cryptography that you can spend all afternoon trying to figure out," Shiller said. "So the story has inspired young people and active people, and that's what's driving the market.
Cryptography/Blockchain technology is the story that is driving the market.
I tend to think of bitcoin as an experiment," he said. "It is an interesting experiment, but it's not a permanent feature of our lives. We are over-emphasizing bitcoin, we should broaden it out to blockchain, which will have other applications.
He also said that there is a political side:
Part of it is political. Economists tend to neglect the political side," he said. "There's a big element of people [who] don't trust the government anymore. They like the idea that this didn't come from the government. It came from some real smart computer scientist. They like that. It's a great story for today's markets.
I wouldn't call it political. People's distrust in the government is driving the Bitcoin market, now doesn't that make Bitcoin a socio-economic experiment?
Robert Schiller did said that Bitcoin is the best example of a bubble, tulip mania and it's collapse was imminent and then changed his opinion to cryptocurrencies could linger on for a good long time and now faddish human behavior, but at the same time consideringthe decentralized socio-economic angle of Bitcoin. He seems a tad bit confused and he did said that he doesn't know what to make of Bitcoin ultimately.