Bitcoin is not tailored for anyone, but nor does it discriminate for anyone either. That alone means that Bitcoin is a more favorable monetary system for third world nations than anything that the UN or the US has presented them with thus far.
Don't you need computer/internet access to make use of Bitcoin? I'd say that rules out a lot of people, especially in third-world countries.
Unless you are actively generating, then an end user only needs occasional access to the internet. Or to be precise, occasional access to another client with greater access to other clients. An end user doesn't need live access to the Internet to spend his already confirmed coins. At present, only the receiver needs live access to the Bitcoin network in any given trade, so long as the two parties' devices have some digital method of communicating otherwise, (i.e. Dash7, Near-field or ad-hoc wifi) and only if he has need for independent confirmation that a valid transaction has just occurred. IRL, the vast majority of cash in person transactions do not need this level of certainty to happen as it is today. There is no reason that, in a Bitcoin future, an established shop in Africa couldn't accept a transaction produced by a walk-in customer's smartphone based only upon checking it against his local copy of the blockchain to make certain that said customer owned said coins the last time he updated his blockchain. The double spend attack is technically difficult on many levels, so unless it were to start to become a common form of fraud in the distant trading posts, a blockchain a day out of date is unlikely to be a problem for the purchase of a coke and a candy bar. In a future where only 3% of the population uses Bitcoin once or more a week (which would be a dramatic success) a continuous digital broadcast of the blockchain, via sat downlink or shortwave data undercarrier methods (i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Radio_Mondiale) is downright likely in places where Internet access is rare or insufficient, and not out of the question even in North America. Imagine if XM radio were to commit one channel to a continuous feed of the blockchain.
Even that level of Bitcoin infrastructure might not be necessary if Dash7 radios were to become as common as wifi radios on smartphones, because of the nature of Dash7, an aware Bitcoin client could (and therefore would) mesh with most of the other Dash7 devices within a max kilometer radius, trading blocks and transactions in an open and dynamic network. A network dynamic enough that nodes move around a cityscape throughout the course of a day, constantly trading said packets whenever more recent data is discovered. I don't know if you're a radio geek like myself, but to a radio geek, the opprotunistic mesh network that has an average node range of over half a klick, and the potential for wide and deep node penetration, is a surreal concept. If only 2% of cell phone users in NYC had Dash7 phones, and kept them on all day, there would literally be no place within the city that was beyond the reach of a signal; excepting (maybe) the sewer system and a closed bank vault. One would literally have to be standing in a faraday cage to not be able to see at least one other Dash7 node with an average radius of half a click, and there is great likelyhood that a well made Dash7 node would do far better than half a klick. Network saturation is a different issue, of course; since Dash7 is limited to about 200kbps sustained transfer rate.
