So, does that mean to say that when people start buying Bitcoin and HODLing them, keeping them for god knows when, that's enough to consider adoption?
Now, bitcoin is considered as a risky asset. Why is that? Is it lack of trust? There are lots of fears about bitcoin and its future. When bitcoin becomes less risky (in people's mind) or even reliable asset we can admit that it is more adopted.
Lack of trust follows fear. Fear follows ignorance. The moment the majority of the people finally understands Bitcoin, not even all of it, just at least the most fundamental parts, their fears will surely begin to subside. And that's the moment that they begin to trust Bitcoin. But this does not take the risk away from Bitcoin especially in terms of its being a store of value. The risk remains there.
Or is it that when people start buying Bitcoin and then use it as a medium of exchange or as a real-life money, that's the time we can only say it has reached a decent level of adoption?
Using bitcoin as a medium of exchange is just a small bonus that it provides, that's not important.
I was taken a little aback with this statement.
Bitcoin as a medium of exchange should be the rule rather than the exception. I believe it is what Bitcoin essentially is. On the other hand, it is a tiny bonus that Bitcoin becomes a trusted store of value, although, of course, a good medium of exchange must be able to keep its value strong. Otherwise, if it loses value fast, it is not really a nice medium of exchange.
But then it has grown into it over time as its price value has shown some really great potential.
I believe that the price value growth is mostly related to the trust growth.
If by
trust you mean people trust that its price is going to fly rather than dive. This should not necessarily be equated to trusting Bitcoin itself.
