Bitcoin Forum

Here is the top countries that adapted innovation much faster

1. Switzerland

2. UK

3. Sweden

4. Finland

5. Netherlands

6. US

7. Singapore

8. Denmark

9. Luxembourg

10. Hong Kong (China)
______________________________________________________________________________
https://www.worldfinance.com/home/the-10-most-innovative-countries-in-the-world
______________________________________________________________________________
Here is the

1. San Francisco

2. Vancouver

3. Amsterdam

4. Ljubljana, Slovenia


5. Tel Aviv

6. Portsmouth, New Hampshire

7. Miami, Florida

8. El Zonte, El Salvador

9. New York

10. London
______________________________________________
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/042415/10-cities-leading-bitcoin-adoption.asp
______________________________________________

QUESTIONs
1) When it comes to cryptocurrencies from your point of view. what do the think about why this counries top best in innovation and in the hotspot in bitcoin?

I compared these two for when you are a hotspot in bitcoin and innovation it shows from my point of view that your country is rich and a part of the innovated country this 2021.

2) Do you think of the people of the Government? on why this country is listed in the top 10 best?


I am just curious what others think

If your country is listed quote it and answer what you think

For a lot of those countries, it's not very risky to do something and fail and enough people know that to try. The UK historically has around 30 years of innovation and 20 years of slowness (very roughly) and if this has been the same internationally then that might have been a contributing factor to those countries that have experienced all (3?) cycles so far.

Rather than the government it's probably more the culture though too that forces the government to make decisions. But I'm quite surprised China, India, Germany and France also aren't on the list if this is just based off innovating.

1. I think that is because those people in the top list countries have an open mind to accept a new thing that pops up in many places so they start learning about what that thing is and trying to get involved deeper to see if they can benefit from that or they should leave it right away.

2. It could be people from the government who are involved in the crypto or ordinary people because we do not know who are they who support crypto.

When people think about how they can increase their wealth, they will try to search for other sources of income. And when crypto came to them and offers the investment side by holding crypto for some period and those people see the chance, they will start to buy and hold it and boom, suddenly, their investment grows fast from time to time.

But that is just speculation as we do not know what is the real reason for that country that have fast adopted crypto.

Your list contains highly developed countries that have either a strong economy or have a lot of export. When a country has money, it can channel money for development of different spheres. Developed countries invest in science a lot, so technologies are developing very fast there.
In terms of adopting crypto, it is being adopted not only by developed county as the only one which accepted Bitcoin as a means of payment was Salvador that is not very rich country and because of hyperinflation it adopted Bitcoin.

Hmm, probably the factor of being more advanced than others (minor part) and their spirit of innovativeness probably? (Major part). They also have plenty of space to support said innovativeness hence why they're pretty open to adopting crypto. There'd probably be more countries there tbh but their government is generally in denial of crypto development. Honestly, the concept of money makes the world go round couldn't be more apt, the more resources one country has the more chances they have to explore and innovate after all.

I see most of the countries listed here are small, both demographic way and by population except the China country. The benefit of being small has got big relationship with the countries development and also how they spend the money on innovations. The fact that they have less population and more industrial revolution bring more money to the country and less expenses for government too for developing the nation. This very much burden increase the chances of adopting automising of country at low budget or they just have so much money to adopt the tech that it feels like cheap for them.

Now for country like India where there is huge population and big demography to develop its very hard one to do. Before you could even fulfill the basic need of one population there arises another demand from other activists ans what not. This has led to under developed systems, bad educations out reach and ultimately less adoption of tech stuf. This is big topic to discuss and I think I have just spoken drop from the ocean as to why some of them are so adaptive for tech and some of them are not.

Well, from the point of view of New York.... let's just look at what happened with them in the early days of Bitcoin, namely :

Benjamin Lawsky wanted to profit from Bitcoin, by creating the most complex business license for virtual currency activities in the world (called BitLicense) and this was developed and implemented back in July of 2014. He was the Superintendent of Financial Services back then, but he knew he could make big profits by charging people to "assist" them as a consultant to adhere to all the "red tape" that was required to get that license.

So, he single handily f#%#cked the New Yorkers in the early days and created a huge barrier to entry for Crypto businesses to flourish. The bureaucracy and politics in these cities.... killed their innovation and paused their progress as a Crypto currency hub.  >:( >:( >:(

It all remains at the discretion of a country whether to take action more quickly towards the advantage in terms of Bitcoin adoption or to let other countries take over first. Because if we talk about a country's progress, it depends on its policies, which make it each have its own advantages. If it is classified as developed and developing countries, it will be very difficult to see such rapid development and provide equality to the community.

The list above has indeed become quite a concern, but it cannot be separated from the pros and cons that are still obstacles to their achievement of economic growth. Especially when talking about cities where they make a big contribution to their economic life, which is the benchmark for success.

Because as always they tend to make these list on some indicators that have little to do with the actual innovation, here is an example (https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/analysis-economy) and mix a lot of socialism flavored rating in it, like the GDP PPP in half of them and a lot of useless stuff like Wikipedia edits.

Another stupid criteria is the energy production per capita, lol, what this has to do with innovation? It helps Russia score the 26th rank on that and get close to Portugal on the general score on infrastructure. Just because of that Norway who ranks 1 on that will get a 3rd place overall even with the others criteria ranks being over 20.

As simple as that, it is known that if you have more resources then you can take more risks, and this is because in the case you fail that was some spare money you had set aside that it is not going to interfere with your lifestyle if you lose it, someone that is more limited in their resources will instead decide to go for the safest option as they cannot take the same risk and this means they will have some problems innovating and adapting to inovation.

Deregulation is usually a key factor behind high rates of growth and innovation. Less red tape and obstacles to overcome on the development and production side of things, usually translates to higher growth.

Education and quality development of youth another critical factor. Greater intelligence and knowledge of citizens, translates to higher degrees of growth and innovation.

Credit and loans (liquidity) is another key element of high growth and innovation. A lower bar to entry for quality start ups acquiring financing, will translate to higher rates of growth and innovation.

Finally the last major aspect could be the relative amount of research, development and production that can be achieved per dollar. Scientific research that costs $20 in the USA might be equivalent of $1 of scientific research that can be achieved in another country. For reasons similar to american healthcare being more expensive in contrast to foreign nations.

Culture also factors in. Nations like japan which have high rates for interest in engineering and science fields. Typically enjoy higher rates of innovation and development than nations like the USA lacks a culture of interest in engineering and science fields. The united states has tried for many years to foster interest in science and engineering in its youth. Without success.

1. Its all about acceptance and thanks to the government itself because it wont boom out if government had banned or having negative stance to crypto in the first place but it turns out to be positive then it did really make adoption more faster.

2. Level of adoption and thats just common sense.They wont be on the rankings if we do saw low recognition or adoption of bitcoin.
Not on the sense on being legal tender but at least on some aspect which turns out to be positive.

How about minding on telling those negative ones?

It is easy to follow that if your country or city is one of the most innovative countries or cities in the world that it is also a Bitcoin hotspot. If a country or city is very open to innovation, it is most likely that it has also embraced Bitcoin, one of the most popular rising innovations in finance for the past years.  

As to why these countries are top in terms of innovation, I cannot speak as if they all share similar characteristics. There must be a mixture of factors. Hydrogen mentions some of them.


Partly, it is about the government. After all, whether a country embraces a certain innovation or not largely depends on policies and regulations and whether or not they are tolerant and open. But there must be far deeper reasons why a certain country, people, culture, and so on are leaning toward adoption and not resistance to innovation.

Both have different cause:
- Countries that have faster technology adoption = they invest heavily in human capital (education, R&D, etc.)
- Countries that adopt Bitcoin = they have more freedom or less government intervention*

*it shouldn't be that way since money is heavily used in commerce/trade, so in the future when governments become more open to Bitcoin, countries/cities that adopt Bitcoin should be countries/cities that do a lot of trade.

Government run by the people who have knowledge and futuristic vision in their decision that is what makes the difference, especially some countries wre banning bitcoin with no actual reason but in reality they don't know what is blockchain so they simply call bitcoin and blockchain is scam so they are banning it and also comment that by this move their country will become crime free, biggest joke isn't it? ;D

Not worrying about justice. I know that "justice" may not be something that many people who live in those places realize that they have and very valuable but for all of us who live in other nations we realize that justice is the most important thing. When your nation is so corrupt that you find out your president stole few billion dollars from the citizens and it didn't even make the news, I do not mean any consequences, it literally doesn't even make the news because news is afraid of the president and doesn't deliver that news, so you find out about it on social media.

This is why justice is important for innovation and planning for the future. If you do not have justice, then who will make innovations? Nobody would be caring about getting better because they do not have a hope that it will be supported and someone close to president could literally steal it anytime they want.

Then why is the US there higher placed than Spain, France, and Germany?
You said the cost is a negative here, I don't think anyone would claim deregulation is a key factor, not with all the laws in the EU, I honestly think they would score again in education against the US, at least according to the PISA scores, and credits and loans are actually more accessible in at least one of these countries, so why are they lagging behind?
The reason is exactly money, but not how you pictured it, the enormous amount of money the USwith its investors and companies can throw at any project sums that other countries can't even dream of. That's why everyone migrates there with their start-up with they shall company once it has a product, the difference in available financing is beyond enormous.

Many time I get the fact that innovation are adopted much faster by western countries than my countries. There must be a factor that causes these countries to top the list in term of openness to adopting new emerging innovation and one of them is culture and information. Developed countries will lead, while developing countries will always be left behind.

It's the people that will normally drive adoption, and since people elected the people who will govern the country, they should be listening to what people want, and crypto although new can be regulated so adoption is happening because the government is willing to adopt and regulate crypto.

In our country, crypto is already regulated but the adoption is still low, well, what can I expect, our country is not as rich as the countries listed in the OP, so we will just follow, but it's better than to be left behind.

I think the most obvious reason is that the high ranking officials of those respective countries aren't too corrupt and greedy about the connections they have despite of their positions in the government, they prefer to adopt new technologies and inventions as time goes by and have the right funds for the right projects. Especially when cryprocurrencies are so famous and so fancy to own nowadays, they had the right mindset that's why their economy keeps on growing.
And that's how they stay in the top 10 list of most innovated countries across the globe.

Op, in terms of the difference between the list of top cities and top countries, I think it's because in some places big cities (often the capital) have a high degree of autonomy and can act swiftly and be more progressive than their countries in general.
Regarding the lists overall, I agree these are largely prosperous places, but there's one important exception: El Zonte. El Salvador is a country with a terrible economy, and the majority of people there are far from rich, with many living in poverty. If you read about El Zonte, it's a village where people are fishing and farming, and photos (https://www.afr.com/world/south-america/this-village-in-el-salvador-offers-a-glimpse-into-the-crypto-economy-20210611-p580bq) don't exactly scream 'prosperity'. That's because unlike the rest of the list which consists of places that can basically afford to take a risk and experiment with innovations because they're prosperous, El Salvador basically went all-in on Bitcoin, which is a huge risk they're taking out of desperation and due to their authoritarian leader's strong faith in Bitcoin.

These cities are open to modern technology adaption which includes cryptocurrency that's why their progress and modernization is too fast. Since people are knowledgeable and open to adaption, they're able to develop different aspects that affect the improvement of their city. I must say that these cities are risk-takers which is an advantage.

The difference is that if your nation is a dictatorialship or just not "great" in any regard at all when it comes to corruption, then it means you leave it to the dictator in charge to accept bitcoin and crypto. Whereas when you are in a great nation where even the president could be charged with something (which may sound understandable to some people who live those nations but UNIMAGINABLE for people like me where I live) you could get people to actually care about a thing and get it legal.

El Salvador is different because it was the president who pushed for it, if in North Korea the president there ends up wanting to push for it, he can, if China wants to they can, if they don't want to they could ban it, simple as that. So all in all I would assume that it would be very reasonable for certain not so rich nations to end up getting crypto to accepted only if the president wants to.

This list doesn't make any sense. Innovation doesn't matter at all if you're talking crypto. Bitcoin itself is not innovative, it's an alternate currency system, the technology is not ground breaking, it's not new. The only hotspots for Bitcoin are economies that can support it, meaning a wealthy population. Whether or not the Nordic countries are innovative in their technology has little to do with bitcoin adoption if the population are generally satisfied with their government and sustain confidence in their local currency. There is no incentive to ditch government back currencies if you already trust them.

Very few countries around the globe are technology wise developed. When we talk of innovation/technology based development what comes to mind is the infrastructure development. Very few countries are able to plan and execute thinking the future, whereas most of the countries plan the infrastructure development for a short term. In terms of cryptocurrency adoption my city hasn't reached a milestone, because of the government's on the same. But people of my country are much used to it and are to the next level of adoption.

Funny thing.
Even if UK adopted Bitcoins wholeheartedly they still do not accept cryptocurrencies as a form of investment for supporting financial statements. Which does mean that there is still a long way to go for them.
I do think we should talk about El Salvador in detail as well what the country is doing is amazing. They are even going to mine Bitcoins using renewable sources of energy which can also be taken as a green flag for the Environmental summits happening every now and then.
My native country is suggesting to ban bitcoins right now which I think would be immensely sad for the people involved rest there are still countries like Ukraine which is silently accepting bitcoins and cryptocurrencies more.

The main reason for this is that many nations do not have the funds to improve tech. Many nations are working to just survive, whereas there are some super rich nations with liberal policies where they do pay people for innovating or creating great jobs and so forth. Amazon (as far as I know) didn't pay a dime in federal taxes for example, which is proof enough that they are promoted to use that for creating more jobs and innovation.

Elon musk got 3 billion dollars in contract and a ton of billions of dollars as a loan as well just so he could create spacex and keep it going. So, I would say that it is clear when there are a lot of money in a nation then innovation could be done by government or it could be done by people in that nation and get funding. Which is why we see it in those cities and not in other cities who are barely surviving and under a lot of debt.

I can tell you just about a few of them:

San Francisco was able to create a hub of technology and a go-to place for innovation as a first mover. Many other cities have tried to replicate this, but is just not possible - it has to grow organically from a certain economic, political and cultural environment.

London has an abnormally oversized financial sector and two of the world class universities nearby. Money, talent and fintech grow well together. Needless to say that Londoners have an insatiable appetite for the next gadget or service out there that can either make their life better or make them look better.

Miami and Florida in general have the University of Central Florida and other educational centres that may not be the firsts you would hear about but are certainly doing their job in creating high-paying ready individuals and feeding the accelerators and incubators, second only to California.

Economy, leadership. This is a big jump to accept it and it requires time consuming research before they did. Perhaps, they even paid for consultations just so they could really adopt it.
But there is a problem that I see beyond it, they accepted it but was not meant for usage. It became like a display just to say they are one of the innovative countries unlike what El Salvador and Japan did.
It's like a race of who did it first and not literally adopted for a change.

The government of this countries are innovative and have the growth of their economy at heart, some of them may not know in details what the system the have adopted is all about but the trust the judgement of their citizens and are particular about how the economy rises in the nearest future.
Unlike most of our countries which instead of adopting the system choose to completely ban the use of it with no justified reason.
If we're to research thoroughly, we'll find out that this countries are doing far better than those of ours yet to adopt the system.

All the counties and cities in your list have one thing in common-High standard of living.
This attracts young and talented people from the poor countries,which leads to a migration from the poor to the rich countries.
All those countries also have several other features:
1.Less bureaucracy and easiness of registering and running a business(maybe except USA).
2.Good educational system.
3.An abundance of young and highly qualified people(some of them are coming from underdeveloped countries).
4.An abundance of risk seeking investors,who are willing to invest into high tech startups.
5.The entrepreneur culture in these countries favors innovation and new technology,rather than traditionalism and conservatism.
6.Good infrastructure.

Because these cities are so relevant at all levels, it is noteworthy that they are practically the most representative in the world, with my good economies, but putting all of them aside, I think one of the cities that need to be reviewed or more Well, a nation that must be reviewed is El Salvador, whose country only survived with international remittances, and since President Bukele implemented the use of Bitcoin as one of his main currencies, everything is going well, in fact, everything they do he is earning great profits from the government whose action will be focused on the improvement of his country.

There is a public list of how easy is to do business by country. This is published officially and has certain weight on the decisions many large companies take on regards to where they choose to open central offices and even on how they decide to conduct business and on doing so at all. Corruption, they can live with most of the times for the larger part, but unnecessary burdens, taxes, bureaucracy, union power, and other issues of the like are not accepted.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-20-easiest-countries-for-doing-business/ (https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-20-easiest-countries-for-doing-business/)

As you can see, the list matches well the list of cities you have listed.

Cities with high natural resources will of course be faster in responding to the times, so that cities are very open to responding to the development of cryptocurrencies. On the other hand, an environment that is very influential on the rapid spread of news, among business people and their community, it will be easier for them to exchange ideas for mutual progress.

It doesn't surprise me that Switzerland is on the first place in your list. For hundreds of years Switzerland has been the place for wealthy people to invest their money anonymously. Hiding the names and identity of their clients is one of the big selling points for wealth managers to open bank accounts in Switzerland. No wonder that they are staying up to date in the financial world. Innovations and going with the trend is one of the reasons of the crypto success. Having the chance to be independent and secure from the reach of federal governments is interesting for most investing. Unfortunately are the services provided in Switzerland usually for the wealthy clients. Trying to invest 5 or 10,000 USD is not very lucrative for the banks. That is why cryptos are so attractive for the average Joe.

It honestly depends and it's a bit counterproductive to try to pigeonhole each country into either innovative or not innovative.

The US is definitely still leading the way with adoption but other countries are catching up when it comes to crypto use.

Singapore and Australia are up and comers in the field in my opinion, but that could change in a heartbeat.

Everything could changed in a heartbeat and pretty much sure that majority of those countries which are still in neutral phase or still on observation does

still wait up for the entire herd on going with the same line but we are already seeing that some of them do made out decisions without relying on other countries decisions when it comes to this.

Each country does have its own decision it might neither be influenced externally or would definitely be independent on what they are current seeing.
Lets not make in a hurry and let adoption move on its own.

Unfortunately very few governments are run by people like that, people that are interested in innovating and have a vision for the future are out there making their dreams a reality, like satoshi, while politicians have most of the time a vision of the world in which they retain their power and as such oppose innovation, fortunately for us the world is always trying to move forward, so regardless of what the politicians want if an idea is good then people will eventually adopt it, so while it will take some time the pressure of the people will force politicians to accept bitcoin even if they do not want to.

Most countries that accept crypto from the start did not intend to make a change, because they still believe in the old system. That's why many
countries that accept crypto only limit it as a digital asset, very different from what has been done by the state of El Salvador which legalized
Bitcoin as a legal tender. This means that most countries really just want to look like innovative countries and not be left behind by technological
advances. The reality is that many country is not really using crypto for change. Perhaps if in the next few years El Salvador experiences a very
rapid development in the economy, it will trigger other countries to adopt crypto for change. Sometimes a country wants to adopt new things,
if it is really proven that the new thing will make other countries experience positive changes first.

Mostly those 3rd world country cant adapt crypto currency fast since they dont have enough resources like internet and other devices since it is really a poor country. On the first world country that is we called a lot of resources that can catch to the latest tech and able to adopt easily in crypto. Also having communication with other countries to exchange ideas , i think that was for business purposes only but in terms of crypto most of the countries right now are just thinking of it

If anything, these countries are more open to change, and them failing on accepting said changes won't really put them in too much trouble since they can easily bounce back as if nothing happened. Also, culture probably plays an important role, too. Other countries that haven't posted any significant contributions or innovations in the past tend to have leaders and people that are extremely conservative, and won't change their ways just because something is more efficient by just a small percent.

my country is not included in the list because it is still a developing country...

The government of my country still strongly considers bitcoin to be something that should not be allowed to be freely allowed so that our government only allows bitcoin as an investment asset, not a means of payment, whereas in developed countries such as Singapore, they have begun to want to take advantage of the advantages that can be obtained from bitcoin as well as possible.

In general, developing countries - 3rd world countries - are actually slower to catch up because of technological infrastructure that still does not reach all regions, especially remote areas so they cannot know a system and innovation that is developing in this world is not like developed countries too poverty and the culture of the people in the country also make it difficult to accept it

Having less problems. That is right, having less problems in a nation and for a city means that they could focus on getting more innovative and progressive. If everything goes well in your nation then you could focus on crypto or any other thing as well.

Look at all those marvelous places you can visit in London to have fun, the museums, the operas, the plays (specially royal shakespearen group), and many other things that looks like normal life in UK, but a very elite sense of fun for many nations. Tell the same thing to the south Africans, Indians, Chinese, West Africans and even some Pakistanis. You will not see that much elite fun in regular life of regular citizens there, why? Because UK managed to steal all the resources from those nations and grew superbly economically and gave their citizens a prosper life that can focus on beauty in the world.

There is quite a bit distinction between the two, because while the first set talks about innovation in all different sectors (of which Bitcoin is a insignificant fraction of the economy) we see at least half the second batch being in North America. While El Salvador were certainly groundbreaking in their adoption of Bitcoin as an official currency, besides that their tech sector and Bitcoin functionality would be dwarfed by many other places - I'm not even sure how they made the list, somewhere like Tallinn in Estonia should really sit in that slot. Anyway, the fact is these countries have solid legal and financial structures that are enforced, while the workforce is willing to adapt to new technologies - I'd say those would be the most useful drivers.

I agree that the most important thing for a country to be able to catch up with technological developments, the country's technological
infrastructure must have reached all regions. Meanwhile, third world countries whose population is still high in poverty, usually there are
still many areas that do not have internet access. So not all residents in third world countries can enter the crypto world, whereas crypto is
one solution to improve the economy. It is the duty of the government to immediately make all regions achieve technological infrastructure
evenly, so at least all areas have internet  access. Because I believe that the more people in third world countries can access the internet,
then the country's economy will change for the better. Because there are many opportunities to be able to make money on the internet compared
to having to look for work in the real world, it can indirectly reduce the poverty rate in the country.

The government need to take initiative to develop the financial technology. Right now very few countries have got the perfect fintech infrastructure whereas majority are in the developing stage. My country hasn't come to a conclusion about the development of fintech infrastructure for a long. Today on an article read about the State policy for the development of fintech infrastructure. Maybe within few years time we'll get higher level of adoption and acceptance of bitcoin.

They are mainly rich places? I mean if you look at the cost of living in those cities, and compare it to the mean average of the rest of the world you will realize that these places are one of the richest ever. If you look at the nations they are in, they are from the richest nations as well, hell California (San Francisco) is 5th biggest economy in the whole world if it was a nation.

So, to think that they have a bigger crypto presence is basically all due to them being rich. This is why I believe that we are talking about something very valuable here, it is definitely something about the wealth that they have which caused them to be at the top of the list.

I believe just because a country is innovative it doesn't mean they are going to stand out in crypto currency sphere. Their focus in search and development for innovations might be addressed to another matters such as energy production, health sector, tourism, accessibility and so on... What means crypto currency or digital finances stay in second plan.

In the case of top 10 leading bitcoin cities I see what they have in common are the crypto businesses (especially popular exchanges) operating in their territories, added to the fact those are traditional cities known for the development of new startups, entrepreneurship activities and financial opportunities in general, what makes them fertile spots for investors and innovations related to the financial world, naturally including bitcoin and its altcoins pairs at some point, as we are already seeing right now.

There would be some progress and that would vary on the govenrment you do have whether they are really serious in regards on development on the country or places that they've been holding up and as a citizen then we wont really be having a choice but to wait up on what would be their
future steps to make in regarding with the development and acquiring or adopting the current trends that we do have now.

Well, most of most these countries and states that are listed here didn’t just come out and became rich just like that. It’s all about the citizens or people that are living in that location being hardworking and able to raise themselves to the standard that they are right now. It’s just like when they said that Rome isn’t built in a day, it took years for it to be to that level that it is.  Big places like this are where you would see big investors and institutions, and these are the people who are more likely to invest in cryptocurrencies.

These locations would have higher adoption of cryptocurrency, because they have more understanding of what this is all about, and they have enough money to invest in it. Investment requires money, a state that is poor wouldn’t be talking about investment. There would only be a higher adoption of cryptocurrency in places where people are rich. All these big institutions that we are seeing today that are buying Bitcoin, most of them are from these locations.