|
While that's a reasonably valid assertion of the state of Bitcoin's protocol development compared against the state of the collection of protocols and services we call the "Internet", I believe that they are similar but not completely relatable. For the vast majority of people in the World the advent of the Internet was a completely ground-breaking, and completely original, idea. The predecessor technologies that provided similar utility for people (such as phone, fax, radio, television, libraries, social clubs, lunch meetings, etc.) were functions that didn't have a cohesive string that tied them all together and put them in one place. The Internet served that need by providing lots of perceived benefits to people; wide-spread adoption rapidly followed. On the other hand, Bitcoin has a very specific utility right now -- it facilitates the transfer of value quickly and at (relative) low cost in a (reasonably) anonymous fashion without oversight. While a significant number of people all around the World use the banking system, I'd wager that if you asked if their banks and investment accounts "worked well enough" that you'd hear a majority say that they do (and then you'd hear all of the caveats of what doesn't work and what they hate about it -- but not enough to seek out alternatives yet). Bitcoin is still looking for it's toe-hold to convert that mostly satisfied majority. I believe it (or another blockchain-based technology) will find it, and sooner than later, but I am not blinded to the fact that it could end up being viewed in history as simply an interesting experiment that ultimately was ahead of its time. |