I don't think so, because the death of Bitcoin would mean the rise of another Crypto-Currency, a replacement. Crypto mania can't die because it's already part of the life of many people in the world: traders, gamblers, developers, businessmen (and even some criminals)...

People are motivated by rewards. And a reward can be money, better life conditions, more comfort, more accessibility and Capitalism is a good way to give each person the reward he/she really deserves. It's a natural way of life, there is no reason to create so many polemics around it.

In countries where Capitalism is strong the youngs are blaming it. And in countries where Capitalism is weak people are starving or fleeing to other countries, especially the youngs. So, caution with what you desire, it might become true and the reality can be very different from your expectations.

Usually mass adoption only happens when the "lords of the world" start promoting it ostensibly. I believe to think it in large scale considering only individual efforts is a daydream. Businessmen (little, medium, big ones...) can adopt the currency and incentive their customers to adopt too and they may be successful on it, but it doesn't mean the mass adoption will happen.

The masses will come when the governments tell them to do this... And it will only happen when Crypto reach to a safe centralized stage. I don't think it's good, but that is how the masses work.

I observe first world countries have their own technology and companies, while developing countries have cheap labor force and usually work for these foreigner companies. Population might be another factor: Developed countries aren't overpopulated in relation to their territory size, developing countries are. Developed countries export manufactured products, while developing countries export raw materials or cheaper products.

Actually, I would wait the person ask me about it, or I would wait the subject appear naturally during a conversation. This way there are more chances the introduction of this person to Bitcoin will be more pleasant. Then I would say what I know about it and offer my guidance, if requested by the person.

I would use my personal experience in Crypto world as a tutorial for other people too. So they could learn the basics ''for free'' and improve their experience before putting some money on this adventure.

Sometimes a little investment can have the same efficiency of a big investment on the right hands. Some people do much with little while others do little with too much. It will depend on each investor's skills (and some luck too).

Just be prepared for the consequences, they can be positive or negative, and try your best.

I don't see anyone worshiping Capitalism, it's just a natural way of life and a way to defend the indidivual liberties against the implementation of failed systems. If you are a socialist in a Bitcoin forum you will surely find many replies against you and it doesn't mean they are worshiping Capitalism.

Technology evolves, less workers are needed, the whole society benefit from the improvements (even the masses). So there is no reason for revolutions that will lead people to starvation and death again.

I think you have to use the manipulators at your favor. Small investors are weak on the market, they can only follow others actions to make some good movements, so they have to follow the manipulators... If you are a whale, then it's another story and you might try showing your strength to help the market stay green, going against the manipulators.

They like Crypto-Currency without doubts, but they don't like the decentralization. It's possible to keep the innovation and technology without keeping the decentralization and I believe that is their point. Banks like to be on the control of the situation and in decentralized world they couldn't be, so as you said, they have to "adapt" it, until it becomes fully pleasurable for them (centralized).

Then I don't see any difference between the currently traditional financial system and a centralized Crypto world.
It's six of one and half a dozen of the other.

As I see nowadays the "millenials" have access to items the last generations couldn't, because they were expensive. It's an improvement, and in a big parcel thanks to Capitalism. Take the 2000's as an example: cellphones, computers were scarce, and now anyone has a cellphone (modern ones) or a laptop.

Also, the workload is the same like always... The wages are normal too.
Life could be much better, but from the financial aspect it's much better than it was decades ago.
* Blaming Capitalism won't help anyone anyway!

Hypes are just a illusion, they aren't solid and finish at any time without warnings. And many people nowadays are lead by hypes, they just follow others steps (those who create the hypes) and when the hype is over they move themselves to the next one as it was the first.

It didn't happen only to Bitcoin, but to the music world, actors, shows, businesses, everything... It's inevitable. The point is that Bitcoin has to proove it is more than just a hype, then it can grow again and bring new enthusiasts to use it for real reasons and not just because it's a hype.

Yes, it can help people to earn some extra money, but I'm not sure if it's a real solution. Because as you know, without experience, skills and knowledge it's not possible to find many good jobs options, even if they pay in Bitcoins. Anyway, it's a way to start earning money, better than nothing and at least nowadays people are having this opportunity, different from years ago, when BTC didn't exist and internet access was more restricted.

Bank system is safer than Bitcoin if we look through the "mistakes" perspective. When sending Bitcoins you need to be very careful, once you hit the "send" button it's done, irreversible... At banks there are more guarantees you won't commit any mistakes: you put account number, agency, name of the recipient, and even if there is a mistake after all, you can contact the bank and they may accept reverse the transaction for you (depending the situation, of course).

But at banks you don't have any privacy and it's not considered safe in many cases...

Technology is good and offers new possibilities, but I still think the printed vote is the best option. You vote and a printed receipt is dropped in a closed box. If there are doubts about the final result, all the receipts will be counted again. Surely, these boxes will be closely watched all the time.

And everything that matters for Venezuela is to keep the dictator ruling the country, don't expect any innovation from their side, let alone transparency from their electoral system, well known by frauds.

Even if the market reaction were impressively positive Bitcoin couldn't reach $100.000 so fast. That kind of event only happens in our dreams... But if it can really hit $10.000 as you say it's already an acceptable mark, better than nothing. However if Bitcoin can reach a little further like it usually reaches at the end of the years it will help the currency to start the new year stronger, recharging the market's confidence and morale.

It's still hard to introduce people into Crypto-Currency world. Some people see it negatively at this moment, as last year Bitcoin was skyrocketing and now it's taking some time to rise again. They aren't confident about taking the necessary risks... And some might be seeing me as a fool to continue investing time and money in Bitcoin without guarantees it will profitable.

Without doubts news have great influence over Bitcoin's price. The little investors may not act according to the news, but the big ones do. Big investors (or their advisors) are constantly checking the news to know what should be their next move on the market, it's all about strategy to prevent losses, take a precious uncommon opportunity or just to keep the profit coming in without unexpected crisis.

I think when a country adopts Bitcoin it's always positive for the currency as the demand will increase and its price will increase as well (at least on short term). But it may not be positive for the people of that respective country which adopted Bitcoin officially, by the government's endorsement. The reason is that when a government endorses Bitcoin, they are trying to stay behind it, centralizing the currency on the local sphere, inside the country's borders.

And with centralization there are extra costs for the user, what can make the usage of Bitcoin more expensive and uninteresting for many people... And when it's uninteresting the demand drops, and the impact becomes negative even for the currency in general (on long term).

On long term these places will have all the necessary requirements to adopt Bitcoin, if desirable. Actually, Crypto-Currency's impacts will be much more visible on long term, it's a natural process that happens slowly, especially in precarious places.

It's like electricity here. Decades ago there wasn't electricity in rural areas, but nowadays I don't know any houses that don't have access to this. It's a big achievement compared to the old times and in some decades, I believe people will say the same about Crypto-Currency. However, if fiat will disappear or not it's unpredictable...

Indeed, however for some people a red is a red and a green is a green, doesn't matter the references, they rely blindly on what the official trust system shows them. This change would turn the system just a little more "didactic", what I think it's valid.

But for those who have their own judgement/opinion about the different presented situations it wouldn't make any difference.