Bitcoin Forum

I think we need to be a little more mindful about the arguments we're presenting when discussing Bitcoin with critics.  Have a read of this blog/article: It's not still the early days (https://blog.mollywhite.net/its-not-still-the-early-days/).  They make a compelling case.

Yet people still frequently say it is "early days" or that Bitcoin is "still in its infancy".  It's not.  A generally accepted definition for 'infant' is:

"a schoolchild between the ages of about four and eight" 

Bitcoin is more closely akin to a teenager.  Both in years and level of development.  It's not fully mature, but it's certainly no baby.  And I think we risk selling Bitcoin short by comparing it to something so vulnerable.  Bitcoin has survived in the wild for years against determined attackers.  It has time and again proven itself resilient and indomitable. 

It's the usage and acceptance of Bitcoin we are trying to refer to as still maturing.  Not the technology itself.  And we need to make that distinction clearer for the critics.  What are peoples' thoughts on how best to delineate between the level of adoption and the level of technological development?

matter of fact maths first

bitcoin working life (mining for reward (work income)) is until ~2142..  (fee income is the pension/commission/bonus ontop/after)

that is a working life of ~132 years.. (after that is more passive labour, for pension)
comparing that to human working life of 65 years (is about 2x factor)

so bitcoin is 13 years, which in human life /2 is 6.5 years..
soo if we go with human infancy of:

A generally accepted definition for 'infant' is:
"a schoolchild between the ages of about four and eight"  
6.5 fits right in

..
that said.
the word infant does give off the subliminal image of a hapless baby needing a support system and not independent yet, clumsy and vulnerable as doomad said. so maybe calling it by a different analogy could help

"evolving"

While you're pretty much correct, you have to a bit tolerant with the terms used.
In the same way as with the $69k ATH some people have just started reading about Bitcoin and it's CPU mining (!), we can expect people come and consider Bitcoin still in it infancy.

I will translate some joke I've heard:
- *sigh*
- Oh, Martin, why are you crying?
- *sigh*
- What on Earth has happened?
- Aristotle has died!! *sigh*
- Oh, Martin, but Aristotle has died more than 2000 years ago!
- *sigh* yes, it doesn't matter, I've found out only today! *sigh*

I don't try to define a name-calling for Bitcoin but yours looks good, teenager.

• The bullish case for Bitcoin (https://medium.com/@vijayb_24615/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoin-6ecc8bdecc1)
• In that article, Vijay wrote about Lindy effect that will become bigger with time. That is exactly what we are witnessing and what you raised here.
• I agreed with you that after 13 years, Bitcoin is no longer in its infancy. From its age (13 yr old) to Lindy effect, it is far from infant time

I think that most time people say "Bitcoin is still in its infancy" they are talking about the potential bitcoin still has to grow in adoption and price.

In the end, this line of thinking is most about price and the upward potential.

I agree that this vision is not so so true anymore. Time has passed, and bitcoin is not something restricted to a few people anymore.

From 2017 when I met bitcoin things changed a lot. I read about bitcoin everyday  in most newspapers. Most people has a small understanding about what bitcoin is.

There is still a upward potential, a lot of room to grow in adoption and usability, but bitcoin has already achieved a lot.

How about a gentle correction or reply when seen to "Bitcoin is still in it's early stages"
A comment to an online article, an email to the writer, stuff like that.

Don't go in looking for a fight, just a polite comment and statement and move on.

Since we are here, on this forum we are more dedicated BTC people then most. Correcting others because 'we are superior' is going to generate some hostility. Correcting people 'because this may be a better way of saying it' will probably get better responses.

-Dave

I'm definitely not looking to correct the critics on this one.  Their reaction is perfectly reasonable.  My point was that we're the ones not making things clear enough.  The onus falls upon us to explain ourselves coherently.  It's our phrasing I'm seeking to refine, in order to avoid confusion for those "on the outside".  

The premise is to ask supporters of Bitcoin to be aware of the difference between the technology and the level of adoption.  To avoid conflating them.  I'd suggest a phrase such as "Bitcoin acceptance is still maturing" would provide greater clarity than the infancy-type phrases people often use.  That way, it's clear to anyone that we are referring to the usage of Bitcoin.


//EDIT:

Fair point. 

Any further improvements people would suggest upon "Bitcoin acceptance is still evolving" in order to give greater clarity?

still maturing = immature
where as evolving/growing = expanding, gaining energy size, experience

I'd say we're probably far from infancy and bitcoin has been adopted by a lot more people in a fast amount of time than most other technologies (mobile phones for example took quite a while for companies to adopt too for worker communications afaik). PayPal slept on bitcoin so much that they've been overshadowed by other companies accepting crypto and trying to become payment processors (or in some cases actual banks) or payment processors accepting crypto.

The ecosystem's maturing and some companies gave up on the turbulence too (like steam) but crypto is already very usable - with bitcoin as the main on off ramp along with some stables.

I think the adoption of Bitcoin should be viewed from two perspectives:

--> 1) Bitcoin - an instrument for storing value -- measures: institutional investments in BTC (pension funds, hedge & mutual funds, etc.), ETFs accepted and traded on the market, trading volume, number of states that declared BTC a legal tender, survey on people (do they hold BTC, for short-term or long-term, etc.)
--> 2) Bitcoin - a currency used for day-to-day transactions -- measures: number of daily transactions both on the main chain and the lightning network, surveys on people (have they used BTC in the past day, week, month, year)

"Not fully mature" (you nailed it) is I think the right word for it. Not infant, because that's like a start of a roadmap or a beta phase which is not in the case of Bitcoin.
What I see is they are looking at the price of Bitcoin to determine where it is. It's not suppose to be like that but rather the amount of users that are utilizing its service. But to know that needs a deeper research which most people won't do. Lazy human nature.
I admit I see the progress as slow but its because of the sudden broad of competition in the altcoin industry. It's not a healthy competition anymore.

For example, comparing something that is rare, where in this world the rarer an object is, the more it has a high selling value. In society, especially in my environment, this kind of comparison is quite reasonable and can be adapted to the realm of understanding of the people who are still lacking in technology. As for other terms when dealing with children after adolescence, the comparison is different from what I explained to the public at the age of +50.

So, the ideal move would be to describe Bitcoin in terms they hear often but have a valuable selling point.

I think that the reason they say it's in infancy is because there's very low penetration of various markets and social groups. Probably 1 per 100 people will be able to explain what bitcoin is and how to hold it. Some studies estimate that over 1% of people around the world own bitcoin, but that's pretty low compared to the number of people around the world who own gold, which is close to 10%.
I agree that it's more in its teenage years because I doubt it will surpass the penetration of gold unless gold becomes diluted somehow by new cheap mining.

I agree with DooMAD that the technology shouldn't be considered to be in its infancy. The system works, it's not perfect, but it does what it's supposed to do and works as advertised. When it comes to adoption, Bitcoin still has a big mountain to climb. It's advancing nicely, but I would consider it fully matured when I find myself in a situation where I can offer any merchant in any country Bitcoin and he would be happy to accept it the same way they do with cash today.   

Bitcoin is no more in its infancy according to the years of its survival. In terms of market growth too it is no more an infant, because in during this time period it has outlawed different forms of investments, technologies, innovations and more. Compared to its beginning days into usage, now it has got more acceptance and people are more aware about it.

As bitcoin is moving into its next level of growth as a teenager we've encountered the adoption of bitcoin as a legal tender by a country. This will widen with more governments and countries participation.

This critics could have their own reasons for seeing Bitcoin as a technology in its infant stage or early stage, paying close attention to their point of views can sell home some information or a powerful tool for either new blockchain projects or an improvement proposal in disguise. Although Bitcoin has been in existence since 2009 it doesn't change the fact the network and it's technology is still evolving. We won't say the network is perfect yet and as far as technology is concerned there is no right or wrong approach the goal is seen your idea and innovation do what it is supposed to do.

I think you have to look at this from a different perspective, when we look at what the population of the entire world is, About 7 billion if am not wrong, and then compare that number to the number of people holding Bitcoin currently, i think that when you look at the gap, you cant help but agree that Bitcoin is still in its infant stage when it comes to adoption.
few days ago, i did a small research and discovered that less than 3 percent of the entire population of the world is currently into crypto, that's a very very small number when looked at critically.
So for me personally, when i tell someone that Bitcoin is still at its infant stage, I am speaking from the adoption aspect and not on the development of Bitcoin and how long the crypto coin have been in existence.

i prefer still evolving. but yea when speaking of adopting.. hopeful-parents-to-be would rather adopt an infant. so calling it an infant makes bitcoin more "cute" and desired than a rebellious "teenager"

however to me. infant and teenager both feel like words that depict "dependant" not yet independent, needs protecting, care and not free to explore the world yet.

so i avoid infant. even if some find it cute

.
others call it a young adult. because it works. it does its job and gets paid. unlike messy infants that just create poop.

If we consider the span of growth and development of bitcoin, it has already matured. Bitcoin would never survived over a decade and pass through a lot of attacks if its still in its infancy stage. Those people who always consider and recognize bitcoin as in its early stage and has not proven its worth yet, then probably they are the ones who are new here in crypto but would act as if they knew all about bitcoin. The thing which is most frustrating is that all their claims turn out into fake news, like they are the one who'll not gonna survived in this long journey of bitcoin.

Which part of the article is wrong exactly? That "decentralized" web3, that is actually just a centrally controlled corp-network, is a scum? That there aren't "early days" anymore? That most cryptocurrency developers with no moral character try to give solutions to non-existent problems, and re-propose ideas that had already been implemented before, just to make a quick-buck in a seemingly dignified way?

The only thing I can tell to a critic is this: Bitcoin is the technology; not blockchain.

There's this principle I feel obliged to follow when I code open-source software, and that's probably why being open-source is so beneficial:

The problems were double-spending and decentralized minting. Someone did found proper solutions and released the code that implements them publicly. The software works like a charm since 2009 with a few protocol changes. However, the entire thing is dependent on a game theory which is also dependent on the system's money units. People who want to try out their ideas in this ecosystem can only make it more powerful by insisting on the currency.

Building on top of different currencies causes a fine mess, makes it harder to comprehend the usefulness, and cuts the innovation apart, but unfortunately, the technology incentivizes such creation.

Satoshi once said at some place "I believe in the next 20 years there will be a sizable transaction for bitcoin or nothing". This means that at this early stage of 10 years of bitcoin's growth it is still immature and the development and trust in its decentralized system still needed. Obviously now it's not good to say it's a baby, bitcoin has grown into a teenager even though it's only 13 years old.

The most advantageous thing about bitcoin is that it is decentralized where no single centralized authority can control it. Although the users and the community are those who continue to make bitcoin survive and continue to be developed, this is an asset that is starting to be trusted as the most potential asset in various parts of the world and its adoption is even increasing. So far bitcoin has convinced many big investors of how this asset provides security and a good level of privacy about the financial system and it will continue to grow until it looks more mature.

with more than a decade of existence, it seems that bitcoin has gained a lot of interest in the global market. and it seems heading to the sizable transaction route rather than nothing. more and more stakeholders are getting involved. and from the bitcoin tech, it sprouted into other technologies like smart contracts of eth, and now other decentralised apps. we are more than grateful for satoshi to invent btc, because it created other networks that are valuable, which are deploying actual applications in the market.

The idea that Bitcoin adoption will skyrocket, the S-curve of adoption, the Internet/automobile/electricity analogy, are nothing more than wishful thinking. Bitcoiners refuse to look at what stops Bitcoin from getting more adopted, what incentive is there to adopt Bitcoin, they just sit and dream that people will one day install Bitcoin wallets, convert their life savings to Bitcoin and will only use it for the rest of their lives.

bitcoin is the first flagship, hero, famous currency and the first and main hero,famous "brand" of the technology of blockchains. but the blockchain is the main technology that provides the decentralised archiving, auditing and the ability to allow many features within it. blockchains openness to change the features within them allow people to create many altcoins, which is a feature of blockchains tech (not 'bitcoins' tech)

changing the things unique to bitcoin creates altcoins. but those altcoins are still based on the blockchain outer technology

bitcoins uniqueness is in the halving rate(deflation/supply/scarcity) the PoW(underlying value/security/immutability) the unit amount(supply/scarcity) .. satoshi choosing 210k block halving as a number, choosing sha2 as the PoW algo. choosing 5,000,000,000sats as the genesis release amount and calling a 5billion sats/100,000,000 a "btc" are things that make bitcoin bitcoin.
different altcoins have different options/choices


blockchain features like the block Id based on a "sum" of the content, chaining of blocks via the Id's of previous blocks, allowing them to be archives remotes/decentrally while easily comparable by just comparing block Id's
is the blockchain tech stuff

taking away the unique things of bitcoin like the sats.. like the PoW, like the sha256 of pow, .. makes an altcoin,
take away the tx/spend structure and replace it with a file hash index structure creates other things that are not altcoins but still use blockchains

 where the more you change the more you make an altcoin or other token/auditable structure, which is less and less like bitcoin...

take away the blockchain. creates things even less like bitcoin and altcoins. like them smart contract networks that connect between many blockchains that have no consensus or network audit. nor even use units that even resemble bitcoins or altcoins. where even the message formats that go between peers is completely different. makes them less and less like bitcoin

you cant take bitcoin out of its blockchain.

I Agree. Bitcoin is not still in its infancy.

You can clearly see at least a few stages in the development of Bitcoin, and there have been several different episodes already, things like Mt Gox, the silk road, Block size war, lightning, El Salvador, etc.

I can see that now we're starting a new era, in which many banks and financial services want to offer "Bitcoin" without the ability to withdraw it. This seems like a worldwide phenomena, happening in different countries in their banks. This has to be something planned. It's just another chapter of Bitcoin.

Having said that, Bitcoin is still new to many people in the world, and it's still not moving a vast amount of money. For example, the IMF last year simply generated more than the entire market cap of Bitcoin out of thin air.

Bitcoin is still small, but not in its infancy.

Yes, but the more people find consensus on one currency, the stronger it becomes in decentralization, immutability and security. Take BSV as an example; it's using "blockchain technology", but there's no way you can refer to it as a decentralized, immutable and secure electronic cash.

This openness is what takes the cake. Developers can take advantage of the decentralization, immutability and security to build stuff on top of it, or in sidechains. They don't have any benefits on building a p2p cash system from scratch, beyond financial advantage.

I really can't understand how you're coming out to such conclusion.

I think Bitcoin is still in its infancy in many countries. Yes BTC is 13 year old right now, But still its nit that age in whole the world. In many countries BTC is still in its infancy. Still people trying to learning that how its works.

if you think you can take bitcoin out of bitcoins blockchain.. go try it.
i promise you that ALL ~19.085m bitcoins(current circulation) have not left the bitcoin blockchain NOR EVER WILL. they will always be accounted for within the bitcoin blockchain.. thats part of the security/audit/consensus..  but enjoy wasting time trying to remove bitcoins from the bitcoin blockchain.
have fun trying... I DARE YOU

if your seeing "bitcoin" on another network.. its not bitcoin

If you look at the market adoption of crypto, I think its still less than 1% of total market size and the blockchain and crypto tech is going to grow significantly from here. So I assume your assertion is quite true and bitcoin is going to grow big from here.

I think those people who always claim bitcoin at its infancy stage may not have witnessed the struggles of bitcoin since in its first years. Or they can be pro fiat that opposes bitcoin the whole time they know about it. However, if you have recognized bitcoin over a decade and have witnessed how many times it was claimed as dead, then you can never tell that bitcoin is still in its infancy stage, when in fact it’s already 12 years old and counting.

I mean in the grand scheme of things, if we believe that bitcoin is going to be around for a long time and is going to be long lasting, technically it still sort of is in it’s early days. I mean it was only created in 2008, which is really a pretty short time ago.  I think technology wise it’s got a ways to go which makes me feel like it’s still in its early days, perhaps not “infancy” however.

if people think other people should buy bitcoin because of it being an infant.. sends many bad messages
not only the subliminals of being clumsy creating $h!t being dependant on custodians(parents) and being rejected by other parents and still looking for someone to adopt it..
not only the subliminals of bad communicators or not able to travel the world by itself, but all the other infant descriptions..
.. but also the connotations of thinking that people are interested and attracted to infants.. big no no

i prefer someone that works. that can do a job and receive rewards for their efforts.
to me bitcoin is an adult of working age. just still at its early stage of its career, someone investible and employable. someone worthy of hiring and getting to know and having a relationship with. someone you can see still being involved with in 60-80 years time.

be honest. put aside all the FUTURE hopes/dreams aside.. and try to describe an actual infant, of what an actual infant is actually like.. it then becomes clear what you are trying to describe bitcoin as

And that's actually where the problem lies, because Bitcoin can never surpassed gold when it comes to quantity and number of people who owns it as an individual asset, but thou Bitcoin is almost 13yrs old now, gold has been around for more than 10 centuries. So comparing those two makes no sense at all.
But however, regarding the question above, i think saying Bitcoin is at it's infancy sounds somehow, because a 13yrs old boy or girl is not an infant anymore,  they are teenagers,  so I think using the phrase "Bitcoin is at it's teens" sound more better because it's been long Bitcoin left infancy.