I agree that there are big problems with defining global adoption, so we should always try to specify what we mean before providing opinions. If global adoption is about Bitcoin being available and having users around the world, then we already reached global adoption. If we mean that global adoption is when you have options to spend your Bitcoin on various goods and services, we're also already there. If, however, we're talking about a significant amount of people (out of the world population) using Bitcoin, we're nowhere near global adoption as it's used by 2% of the population at best.
Meanwhile, I disagree that Bitcoin cannot be adopted as much as computers or the Internet because not enough time has passed to make such statements. Speculation doesn't mean impossibility of adoption. Your example with the mushrooms shows that it's possible to divide Bitcoins over more people, IMO, so adoption can happen. Some will easily sell their holdings when the price feels right for them.
Topic: Global adoption — A ridiculous term - page 3. (Read 624 times)
The issue becomes clear if you notice its hierarchical structure. I'll quote myself to prevent re-writing a childish example:
And yet, if everyone in the world who owns bitcoin was only interested in holding it in their own wallet because it might be worth more in the future, and never spent it, sold it, traded it, gambled it, used it, transacted with it, etc., then it would be worth nothing.Bitcoin is a currency first and foremost. Global adoption is not going to achieved due to global speculation as you focus on; it will be achieved due to global use. In places like Venezuela where they are experiencing hyperinflation of their fiat currency, bitcoin is already vital tool and currency for the average person not just to protect their wealth, but to be able to survive.
Each bitcoin carries 8 decimal places. 1 bitcoin is 1.00000000. This format defines bitcoin's potential for future growth. As the value of bitcoin increases, transactions will move further to the right of the decimal point.
This is not a hard limit. More decimal places can be introduced if required, and Lightning already works with 11 decimal places with the smallest unit being the milli-satoshi. 
I get what you are trying to imply, the way Bitcoin is presented as a solution for all global financial problems is really ridiculous and so complicated and obviously the investors see their own selfish profits afterall. But the thing is, can there be such a inequality of goods? Like in your example, can there be 100 mushrooms and then 10000 mushrooms imported? Will the people who will bring mushrooms with them won't also bring much btc with them? Also, there are lots of other factors that will prevent Bitcoin or any form of crypto to be used as default global payment anyways!
For early adopters, to increase their wealth through bitcoin is just a consequence of all the benefits the digital currency brings to us. Like you said, bitcoin is great to transact worldwide between two individuals from very distant countries, it's a powerful tool to escape failed national currencies constant devaluation, it's a bridge between your money and investments which wouldn't be disponible through traditional currencies for the average joe.
And for me the greatest advantage of bitcoin is the accessibility it guarantees to its adopters. With bitcoin I can work online and be directly paid without bureaucratic third party platforms asking for documents and taking a lot of time to accept it or freezing funds for nothing. Bitcoin has its advantages and I really would like to see global adoption, so other people could also enjoy these opportunities. Moreover, coins need to be spread among more hands to make decentralization works more efficiently.
And for me the greatest advantage of bitcoin is the accessibility it guarantees to its adopters. With bitcoin I can work online and be directly paid without bureaucratic third party platforms asking for documents and taking a lot of time to accept it or freezing funds for nothing. Bitcoin has its advantages and I really would like to see global adoption, so other people could also enjoy these opportunities. Moreover, coins need to be spread among more hands to make decentralization works more efficiently.
If you search for it, you'll realize that there isn't a standard definition for the “global adoption”. Bitcoiners tend to use it in their sentences as a way to describe Bitcoin's adoption by everyone on every part of the planet, hence “global”.
You are overthinking everything these days.Reaching "global adoption" which I prefer calling "mass adoption" simply means at least some people from any part of the world have adopted bitcoin. Not just in one country or a handful of countries like the developed countries while the rest remain unaware of bitcoin.
(In the system below, 100 fresh bitcoins are brought into circulation every day.)
Let's assume that once upon a time, on an island, there were 100 people with 100 mushrooms in total and each one of them had 10 bitcoins, willing to use it as a currency. This means that each mushroom costs 10 BTC since there are 1000 BTC in total. But, hey, the next day, there are 1000 newcomers bringing 1000 mushrooms and they are also willing to use Bitcoin as a currency. But, unfortunately, there are only 1100 bitcoins in circulation which means that each mushroom now costs 1.1 BTC. Same thing would happen if that little community gained 10,000 new mushroom-farmers the next day. Every mushroom would cost 0.12 BTC.
Let's assume that once upon a time, on an island, there were 100 people with 100 mushrooms in total and each one of them had 10 bitcoins, willing to use it as a currency. This means that each mushroom costs 10 BTC since there are 1000 BTC in total. But, hey, the next day, there are 1000 newcomers bringing 1000 mushrooms and they are also willing to use Bitcoin as a currency. But, unfortunately, there are only 1100 bitcoins in circulation which means that each mushroom now costs 1.1 BTC. Same thing would happen if that little community gained 10,000 new mushroom-farmers the next day. Every mushroom would cost 0.12 BTC.
They're thinking of the scale of the adoption, how big it should be or something like that. What do you propose to name it? Also your claim of reduction in purchasing power of bitcoin for mushroom doesn't work that way I think, if that was the case then the value of bitcoin will probably go up because it has to be divided equally among the economy to keep a steady circulation.
I remember spending the sats that I earned each week. I looked at it that it was fine from the nature of why bitcoin was created. All I had to do was ask the owner of the supermarket to allow me to pay for my groceries with bitcoin. I tried several times but my attempts were unsuccessful because the supermarket owner had no idea how bitcoin could work for him.
As bitcoin gained more popularity last year, I stopped spending it and decided to save it for the future of my underage nephew and niece.
Why call global adoption ridiculous? If bitcoin can be available to everyone, I say it in perspective focusing from a small investor to the largest investors, the return on investment will be fair.
My investment will be among the group of small investors, of course I would be making more money than if I saved it in any bank in my country.
As bitcoin gained more popularity last year, I stopped spending it and decided to save it for the future of my underage nephew and niece.
Why call global adoption ridiculous? If bitcoin can be available to everyone, I say it in perspective focusing from a small investor to the largest investors, the return on investment will be fair.
My investment will be among the group of small investors, of course I would be making more money than if I saved it in any bank in my country.
adoption i guess has some sort of a degree. somehow today Bitcoin reaches the mainstream media already. but it may really not be adopted by everyone. its the blockchain i guess that will be adopted. the last update I've read was that the stock market will soon be tokenized, a kinda migration.
it's gradual just like the internet. back in 1998 i use to just go out and rent on a computer cafe to access my email and send email to my uncle. now i can just tap my phone. the phones are everywhere today, some don't know how to use computers but they easily can use phones.
image source. https://www.finyear.com/Is-Cryptocurrency-the-Future-of-Money_a41914.html
When people say they want "global adoption", I assume they just mean that they basically just want people worldwide to use it. Adoption is a spectrum, so I'm really not sure if most people literally meant "everyone".
As for people wanting global adoption solely to pump their bags, I mean sure these people exist; as with any other investment! But there are also people out there who are genuinely passionate about sound money and sovereignty as well! And probably some people who are motivated by both. I don't think it's far to categorize 100% of the Bitcoiners into the "I'm only in it for the money" category.
Anyway, +1 for unpopular opinion. Brave.
As for people wanting global adoption solely to pump their bags, I mean sure these people exist; as with any other investment! But there are also people out there who are genuinely passionate about sound money and sovereignty as well! And probably some people who are motivated by both. I don't think it's far to categorize 100% of the Bitcoiners into the "I'm only in it for the money" category.
Anyway, +1 for unpopular opinion. Brave.
If you search for it, you'll realize that there isn't a standard definition for the “global adoption”.
The basic theory behind bitcoin mass adoption goes something like this.
Each bitcoin carries 8 decimal places. 1 bitcoin is 1.00000000. This format defines bitcoin's potential for future growth. As the value of bitcoin increases, transactions will move further to the right of the decimal point.
Fundamentals of supply and demand suggest demand can be measured by the total number of end users an application has. If demand is a factor of user base size. Demand could be expected to grow steadily on a path to global mass adoption. Which would in turn inflate bitcoin's price.
Effects of increased investment and speculation are not clearly defined. There is a potential for elevated volatility. And a potential for increased speculation having a balancing and stabilizing effect.
What bitcoin HODL mass adopters are most concerned with is bitcoin's price rising due to an increase in demand. Caused by growth of its user base.
Let's assume that once upon a time, on an island, there were 100 people with 100 mushrooms in total and each one of them had 10 bitcoins, willing to use it as a currency. This means that each mushroom costs 10 BTC since there are 1000 BTC in total. But, hey, the next day, there are 1000 newcomers bringing 1000 mushrooms and they are also willing to use Bitcoin as a currency. But, unfortunately, there are only 1100 bitcoins in circulation which means that each mushroom now costs 1.1 BTC. Same thing would happen if that little community gained 10,000 new mushroom-farmers the next day. Every mushroom would cost 0.12 BTC.
Hierarchical structures don't stop global adoption of anything. There are 2,000ish billionaires in a world of 7,000,000,000 people. And this number is only getting more hierarchical thanks to the benefits that early adopters of pre-inflated cash get as cash gets inflated.
If anything, bitcoin has a better chance than other crypto with more concentrated distributions to become 'globally adopted'.
Bitcoin rises because of speculation, but the more speculation there is, the harder speculation becomes. It takes increasing amounts of cash to change its speculation. Speculation tends to stabilise, as people cash out when they have reached their 'moon' as you put it with your example. The person who was early eventually loses power in such a system after the system stablises at some value, because they can only cash out.
In your example, there are a limited number of people who can come to the island with their mushrooms, which should be devalued with infinite mushrooms using any currency anyways. That is supply and demand economics.
I have a view to this effect that is somehow on the contrary. Its not about the accumulation of wealth as early starters though, this would result eventually but, its about the idea that makes bitcoin more suitable fir the term which you have named this thread "Global Adoption". Its more like a wish, a wish that we hope would come true someday if we continue to persevere.
Sometime ago, I heard there were talks of the whole of Europe using one European currency. Fiat has had attempts of coming up with something that unites all currencies as one but then, it is an idea hindered by boundaries and this would mean the death to one side of the market which is the foreign exchange #Forex. Which won't be appreciated by the government of any nation.
These are a few issues with the fiat that bitcoin has come to solve. First, its got no boundaries, don't have a finite form, its rate is determined by presiding market condition and it remains the same everywhere. These are a few reasons why it feels appropriate and not about the wealth.
Sometime ago, I heard there were talks of the whole of Europe using one European currency. Fiat has had attempts of coming up with something that unites all currencies as one but then, it is an idea hindered by boundaries and this would mean the death to one side of the market which is the foreign exchange #Forex. Which won't be appreciated by the government of any nation.
These are a few issues with the fiat that bitcoin has come to solve. First, its got no boundaries, don't have a finite form, its rate is determined by presiding market condition and it remains the same everywhere. These are a few reasons why it feels appropriate and not about the wealth.
It surely satisfies a lot, don't get me wrong. I personally believe that if you want to buy something from other side of the planet, Bitcoin is your greatest option.
You're right about the wealth, although I would not expect all those who preach "global adoption" actually own significant amount of satoshi.
But the part I've quoted is imho something that shows a problem in your logic: if we want Bitcoin be the "greatest option" for buying "something from other side of the planet", we kinda need global adoption. I can tell that without much wider adoption than now you won't be able to buy much from my side of the planet, amongst many other places
If you search for it, you'll realize that there isn't a standard definition for the “global adoption”. Bitcoiners tend to use it in their sentences as a way to describe Bitcoin's adoption by everyone on every part of the planet, hence “global”.
The same people who believe in the so-called “global adoption” are the ones that see Bitcoin as a currency and believe in its “noble principles”. While I do get their enthusiasm, I think this is very much missing the point. Sad truth, but Bitcoin can't have a global adoption same like computers or internet had decades ago and I state this from an economic aspect. You should just think about it. The more users this thing has, the more the speculation. Not sure why it's being passed from forum members, but it does look like a pyramid scheme with utilities to me. Early adopters/investors get the chance to be included in the peak of the pyramid and earn more long-term. Overtime, I don't believe that it'll remain steady, it will probably reach millions of dollars.
What I want to mean in this topic is that the problem doesn't come from the fact that the majority sees it as an investment. The issue becomes clear if you notice its hierarchical structure. I'll quote myself to prevent re-writing a childish example:
It is justified for a Bitcoiner to want global adoption; he's becoming richer. But, it's tiring seeing it repeatedly represented as the solution to the modern financial system. It surely satisfies a lot, don't get me wrong. I personally believe that if you want to buy something from other side of the planet, Bitcoin is your greatest option. There are many other reasons why you should use Bitcoin concerning privacy and third party prevention, but please, global adoption believers. Stop displaying it as the world's deliverer, because absently, you're doing this to increase your future wealth.
That's why I call it ridiculous.
The same people who believe in the so-called “global adoption” are the ones that see Bitcoin as a currency and believe in its “noble principles”. While I do get their enthusiasm, I think this is very much missing the point. Sad truth, but Bitcoin can't have a global adoption same like computers or internet had decades ago and I state this from an economic aspect. You should just think about it. The more users this thing has, the more the speculation. Not sure why it's being passed from forum members, but it does look like a pyramid scheme with utilities to me. Early adopters/investors get the chance to be included in the peak of the pyramid and earn more long-term. Overtime, I don't believe that it'll remain steady, it will probably reach millions of dollars.
What I want to mean in this topic is that the problem doesn't come from the fact that the majority sees it as an investment. The issue becomes clear if you notice its hierarchical structure. I'll quote myself to prevent re-writing a childish example:
(In the system below, 100 fresh bitcoins are brought into circulation every day.)
Let's assume that once upon a time, on an island, there were 100 people with 100 mushrooms in total and each one of them had 10 bitcoins, willing to use it as a currency. This means that each mushroom costs 10 BTC since there are 1000 BTC in total. But, hey, the next day, there are 1000 newcomers bringing 1000 mushrooms and they are also willing to use Bitcoin as a currency. But, unfortunately, there are only 1100 bitcoins in circulation which means that each mushroom now costs 1.1 BTC. Same thing would happen if that little community gained 10,000 new mushroom-farmers the next day. Every mushroom would cost 0.12 BTC.
Let's assume that once upon a time, on an island, there were 100 people with 100 mushrooms in total and each one of them had 10 bitcoins, willing to use it as a currency. This means that each mushroom costs 10 BTC since there are 1000 BTC in total. But, hey, the next day, there are 1000 newcomers bringing 1000 mushrooms and they are also willing to use Bitcoin as a currency. But, unfortunately, there are only 1100 bitcoins in circulation which means that each mushroom now costs 1.1 BTC. Same thing would happen if that little community gained 10,000 new mushroom-farmers the next day. Every mushroom would cost 0.12 BTC.
It is justified for a Bitcoiner to want global adoption; he's becoming richer. But, it's tiring seeing it repeatedly represented as the solution to the modern financial system. It surely satisfies a lot, don't get me wrong. I personally believe that if you want to buy something from other side of the planet, Bitcoin is your greatest option. There are many other reasons why you should use Bitcoin concerning privacy and third party prevention, but please, global adoption believers. Stop displaying it as the world's deliverer, because absently, you're doing this to increase your future wealth.
That's why I call it ridiculous.
Jump to: