The geeks fail to understand that which they hath created .
another way to look at this is that if you, as a geek, ask the first 49 ppl on the street if they'd ever heard of Bitcoin, they'd all probably say no. on the 50th person, they might say "oh yeah, that's that crazy internet currency of the geeks, right?".
you be so ecstatic that you finally found someone who'd heard of Bitcoin you'd most likely just say "Yes, yes, that's right!!!" and then launch into a discussion about all the great features of Bitcoin. all the while knowing that you don't want to complicate the discussion by correcting that person to the fact that some mysterious "Satoshi Nakamoto" actually invented it.
but you'd be wrong b/c most geeks don't understand the economic implications of Bitcoin and most geeks certainly did not create it.
I never said "most geeks" -- well anyway I don't think I did :-). Regardless your argument is reducto ad absurdum -- "most" of any group don't understand any sufficiently complex thing. And obviously "most" of the geeks did not create any one thing -- there are too many of us.
So obviously I meant something else. Something more like (not going to waste the time to quote myself formally):
I think its a lot easier for a geek to understand economics (to the degree needed to appreciate bitcoin) then for an economist to understand this software.
Also you say "fail to understand that which THEY hath created". Emphasis added.
I think that the particular geek(s) that created bitcoin understood its economic implications. That's why the genesis block is dated "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks".
And I think that more geeks understand its implications then others which is why so many geeks are on this forum. So your statement fails on multiple levels.
Anyway, its not important enough to pursue this further...
