Why are we seen as "early adopters"?

[oda.krell]

We're "early adopters" in a similar sense that the first few nerds technologically interested users of the early WWW were early adopters, pre-AOL let's say.

Back then, TV and newspapers reported about it, the existence of the web (and the Internet in general) was known by a substantial number of people, but only a fraction of those actually used it, because, why bother? You could make  a phone call or write a letter just as easy, so why bother with email? And no way you would ever enter your credit card info on such a shady thing as a form on the web.

It was taken as a fact, seen through the lens of mass media, that "e-commerce" would never really take off, because of security issues and the general lack of interest by consumers. It'd be a niche, forever.

Aah, the memories

[600watt]

...because we are !

[Furio]

The early adopters embraced Bitcoin 5-6 years ago.

People adopting it now, are among the last few thousands to ever adopt it.

How come "the last few thousand"? What is your prediction? Crypto gonna fail or another crypto?

Yes exocytosis is a huge troll and very negative about bitcoin. His old account is falllling who always talks about an upcoming bitcoin doomsday

Probably invested in Ripple

[NotLambchop]

We're "early adopters" in a similar sense that the first few nerds technologically interested users of the early WWW were early adopters, pre-AOL let's say.

Back then, TV and newspapers reported about it, the existence of the web (and the Internet in general) was known by a substantial number of people, but only a fraction of those actually used it, because, why bother? You could make  a phone call or write a letter just as easy, so why bother with email? And no way you would ever enter your credit card info on such a shady thing as a form on the web.

It was taken as a fact, seen through the lens of mass media, that "e-commerce" would never really take off, because of security issues and the general lack of interest by consumers. It'd be a niche, forever.

Aah, the memories

Will this hackneyed internet analogy ever get old?  The reasoning seems to go something like this:

1. Internet was once considered irrelevant, and largely ignored by the media.
2. Bitcoin is now considered irrelevant, and is laughed at by the media.
3. Internet became the defining technology of the 21st century, just a few decades later.
Therefore,
4. Bitcoin will also become the defining technology of the 21st century, just a few decades later.

Is this accurate?

[oda.krell]

We're "early adopters" in a similar sense that the first few nerds technologically interested users of the early WWW were early adopters, pre-AOL let's say.

Back then, TV and newspapers reported about it, the existence of the web (and the Internet in general) was known by a substantial number of people, but only a fraction of those actually used it, because, why bother? You could make  a phone call or write a letter just as easy, so why bother with email? And no way you would ever enter your credit card info on such a shady thing as a form on the web.

It was taken as a fact, seen through the lens of mass media, that "e-commerce" would never really take off, because of security issues and the general lack of interest by consumers. It'd be a niche, forever.

Aah, the memories

Will this hackneyed internet analogy ever get old?  The reasoning seems to go something like this:

1. Internet was once considered irrelevant, and largely ignored by the media.
2. Bitcoin is now considered irrelevant, and is laughed at by the media.
3. Internet became the defining technology of the 21st century, just a few decades later.
Therefore,
4. Bitcoin will also become the defining technology of the 21st century, just a few decades later.

Is this accurate?

The analogy is accurate, up to the point before the Internet / the web took off.

See, this is precisely where you and I seem to diverge in opinion: we are early adopters, similar to pre-AOL web users. That much I'm sure of. And, similarly to the broad consensus back then that "the web will ever only be of marginal importance", I (factually correct, I believe) note that there's a similar consensus by the media (and public opinion at large) as well re: Bitcoin.

That's all I conclude so far.

I am not concluding that this means crypto will be a similar global success as the web. That's you putting words in my mouth. We'll see how far crypto will go.

If you want the tl;dr of the web analogy: The "consensus" opinion on the importance of an emerging technology was very much wrong about the web/Internet, so I don't put much faith in it regarding crypto either.

[NotLambchop]

^
As I remember it, no one laughed and pointed fingers at the internet.  The fingerpointing that took place was focused on the .com bubble.  It eventually proved justified.

Regardless, you seem to be saying here the gist of your internet analogy is "we are early adopters."  If Bitcoin takes the path of the internet, you would be proven correct.
If, OTOH, it follows the course of BTCeanie BTCabies, I'm afraid that people who discovered Bitcoin after 2013 are late to the party

[fewcoins]

Everyone getting in now is realllyyy late... They will continue to get burned as more and more people cash out daily.

[oda.krell]

^
As I remember it, no one laughed and pointed fingers at the internet.  The fingerpointing that took place was focused on the .com bubble.  It eventually proved justified.

Regardless, you seem to be saying here the gist of your internet analogy is "we are early adopters."  If Bitcoin takes the path of the internet, you would be proven correct.
If, OTOH, it follows the course of BTCeanie BTCabies, I'm afraid that people who discovered Bitcoin after 2013 are late to the party

Agreed (Not with the "beanie babies" comparison though. That's just flippant.) I still consider near total failure of BTC a more than just theoretical possibility (for example in the sense that it will be replaced by some centralized government sanctioned pseudo crypto, let's say).

It's just that I a) consider the overall likelihood of a qualified success slightly higher than that of failure, and more importantly, b) when I multiply my expectations (subjective) of price/mcap increase with my expectations of their likelihood (subjective as well), btc still looks like a good investment to me. Risky, but good.

[Miz4r]

^
As I remember it, no one laughed and pointed fingers at the internet.  The fingerpointing that took place was focused on the .com bubble.  It eventually proved justified.

Regardless, you seem to be saying here the gist of your internet analogy is "we are early adopters."  If Bitcoin takes the path of the internet, you would be proven correct.
If, OTOH, it follows the course of BTCeanie BTCabies, I'm afraid that people who discovered Bitcoin after 2013 are late to the party

This Beanie Babies comparison is getting old, just like the Tulips one. Beanie Babies were just useless collectible toys, Bitcoin on the other hand makes it possible to move money around without friction and almost non-existent fees and removes the middleman in transactions. Basically it gives an individual much more control over their finances and takes out the vampires sucking out the wealth from us. There are many other advantages Bitcoin could bring to people but I think you get the gist. Of course as long as Bitcoin is not widely used and adopted it suffers from huge volatility and other disadvantages that counter all the above advantages, and I understand that therefore not everyone wants to jump into it right now. So that's why we are the early adopters who are willing to take the risks of a very young digital currency so it can hopefully blossom later when the advantages start to outweigh its early disadvantages. It's not a given this will happen of course, but you can't deny its potential and possibilities and Beanie Babies had none of that.

I know I might regret replying to a known troll, but I thought I'll just give it this one try.

[NotLambchop]

^
As I remember it, no one laughed and pointed fingers at the internet.  The fingerpointing that took place was focused on the .com bubble.  It eventually proved justified.

Regardless, you seem to be saying here the gist of your internet analogy is "we are early adopters."  If Bitcoin takes the path of the internet, you would be proven correct.
If, OTOH, it follows the course of BTCeanie BTCabies, I'm afraid that people who discovered Bitcoin after 2013 are late to the party

This Beanie Babies comparison is getting old, just like the Tulips one.

The internet comparison, OTOH, just gets funnier with each time I hear it.

Beanie Babies were just useless collectible toys, Bitcoin on the other hand makes it possible to move money around without friction and almost non-existent fees and removes the middleman in transactions.

Only if you don't understand BTCeanie BTCabies.
BTCeanie BTCabies are a store of value, precious due to their limited supply.  As more and more people discover BTCeanie BTCabies, the demand for BTCeanies will increase, while the supply will not.  Ergo, higher BTCeanie BTCabies price, because supply and demand.*

Basically it gives an individual much more control over their finances and takes out the vampires sucking out the wealth from us. There are many other advantages Bitcoin could bring to people but I think you get the gist.

Yes, Bitcoin kills vampires.  Other than that, it's far more inconvenient and far less liquid than normal money.  
And, of course, it loses value like a champ.

*Please understand that BTCeanie BTCabies are a simple substitute for Bitcoin in my arguments.  I use them as a litmus test (or rather a tilde test) to show the absurdity of [similarly structured] Bitcoin arguments.
 

[exocytosis]

The early adopters embraced Bitcoin 5-6 years ago.

People adopting it now, are among the last few thousands to ever adopt it.

Oh wow exocytosis is back....where is your alternate ego fallllling?

Oh yes, I'm the only bearish poster on these forums, of course, so I'm behind every bearish account. Bitcoin is truly so great that everyone in the world -- except one person -- is totally bullish on it. That's right.

[aztecminer]

Bitcoin is just not stable enough at least not to the same level as say the Dollar and that scares merchants and consumers alike. A salary paid in real money, allows people to plan to the nearest cent their budget for the month, you wouldn't be able to do that with Bitcoin. If you have a family/children, it would be unbearable stress not knowing if your $100 worth of Bitcoin will still be worth $100 when you go to the grocery store next week. Bitcoin adoption will keep increasing slowly. It is however unlikely that it will rival real money anytime soon in its current form.

i disagree with you. i believe the 7 year graph here shows a very unstable currency that has a reputation for being used in fraudulent activity such as money laundering and other anonymous criminal activity. as can see in this 7year graph there is a crash after every peak of the dollar. that is volatility coupled with years of federal reserve qe printing causing unstatable currency could crash at any minute and looming bank bail-ins.:

[exocytosis]

The early adopters embraced Bitcoin 5-6 years ago.

People adopting it now, are among the last few thousands to ever adopt it.

How come "the last few thousand"? What is your prediction? Crypto gonna fail or another crypto?

Yes exocytosis is a huge troll and very negative about bitcoin. His old account is falllling who always talks about an upcoming bitcoin doomsday

Every bear is also a troll, by definition. Luckily, there is only one Bitcoin bear/troll in the universe, and that is me aka falllling aka every other bitcoin bear/troll on the internet. Totally true. Because it's not like the average joes of the world are sceptical towards bitcoin. Not at all. And it's not like 99.999 % of the world's population don't own bitcoin, and will never do so.

[NotLambchop]

...
i disagree with you. i believe the 7 year graph here shows a very unstable currency that has a reputation for being used in fraudulent activity such as money laundering and other anonymous criminal activity. as can see in this 7year graph there is a crash after every peak of the dollar. that is unstable volatility coupled with years of federal reserve qe printing:
..

The dollar shows less than 20% volatility over the course of 7 years on your chart.
Ignoring the fact that Bitcoin didn't exist seven years ago, its volatility was in the order of 10,000% over just the past 5 years.

Bonus point:  Calculate the relative stability.

[JimboToronto]

The early adopters embraced Bitcoin 5-6 years ago.

People adopting it now, are among the last few thousands to ever adopt it.

How come "the last few thousand"? What is your prediction? Crypto gonna fail or another crypto?

Yes exocytosis is a huge troll and very negative about bitcoin. His old account is falllling who always talks about an upcoming bitcoin doomsday

Not all trollbears are Faiiiling clones.

Exocytosis obviously has a better grasp of English grammar and spelling then Faiiiling whose malapropisms became somewhat of a local meme.

Trollchop clearly has a better vocabulary than either, despite her difficulties with logic.

None of them can hold a candle to Electric Mucus or Proudhon though. They're witty, entertaining trolls who know how to choose the right moment instead of spamming the forum with boring redundant crap.

[brg444]

^
As I remember it, no one laughed and pointed fingers at the internet.  The fingerpointing that took place was focused on the .com bubble.  It eventually proved justified.

Regardless, you seem to be saying here the gist of your internet analogy is "we are early adopters."  If Bitcoin takes the path of the internet, you would be proven correct.
If, OTOH, it follows the course of BTCeanie BTCabies, I'm afraid that people who discovered Bitcoin after 2013 are late to the party

This Beanie Babies comparison is getting old, just like the Tulips one.

The internet comparison, OTOH, just gets funnier with each time I hear it.

Beanie Babies were just useless collectible toys, Bitcoin on the other hand makes it possible to move money around without friction and almost non-existent fees and removes the middleman in transactions.

Only if you don't understand BTCeanie BTCabies.
BTCeanie BTCabies are a store of value, precious due to their limited supply.  As more and more people discover BTCeanie BTCabies, the demand for BTCeanies will increase, while the supply will not.  Ergo, higher BTCeanie BTCabies price, because supply and demand.*

BTCeanie BTCabies can not be be transacted with.

BTCeanie BTCabies supply is controlled by a centralized entity.

BTCeanie BTCabies are not fungible

BTCeanie BTCabies are not durable

BTCeanie BTCabies are not divisible

BTCeanie BTCabies are hardly verifiable

[oda.krell]

I for one welcome our literate bear trolls, Jorge and Notlambchop. Proudhon switches sides too often to really count as a bear troll, and ElectricMucus is just a Bitcoin romantic turned Bitcoin cynic by the greed and general asshattery that became more prevalent in here.

Option 1: They turn out to be right about crypto's failure, and we will one day look back at their posts as wise words of warning. Trollish wise words of warning.

Option 2: More likely, they'll turn out to be wrong, and during the next rally, I will look back at their posts as a source of entertainment (usually), and justified criticism at the time, even if they were phrased to provoke a reaction.

Option 3: none. I don't buy the "anti crypto shill" idea. Trolling is a reward of its own ^_^

[aztecminer]

...
i disagree with you. i believe the 7 year graph here shows a very unstable currency that has a reputation for being used in fraudulent activity such as money laundering and other anonymous criminal activity. as can see in this 7year graph there is a crash after every peak of the dollar. that is unstable volatility coupled with years of federal reserve qe printing:
..

The dollar shows less than 20% volatility over the course of 7 years on your chart.
Ignoring the fact that Bitcoin didn't exist seven years ago, its volatility was in the order of 10,000% over just the past 5 years.

Bonus point:  Calculate the relative stability.

this guy says bitcoins early volatility is normal S curve activity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHUPPYzzZrI

7 years ago on the chart was the runup to the 2007-2008 financial crisis... which eerily starting to look like todays chart.

[LTListener]

...
i disagree with you. i believe the 7 year graph here shows a very unstable currency that has a reputation for being used in fraudulent activity such as money laundering and other anonymous criminal activity. as can see in this 7year graph there is a crash after every peak of the dollar. that is unstable volatility coupled with years of federal reserve qe printing:
..

The dollar shows less than 20% volatility over the course of 7 years on your chart.
Ignoring the fact that Bitcoin didn't exist seven years ago, its volatility was in the order of 10,000% over just the past 5 years.

Bonus point:  Calculate the relative stability.

this guy says bitcoins early volatility is normal S curve activity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHUPPYzzZrI

7 years ago on the chart was the runup to the 2007-2008 financial crisis... which eerily starting to look like todays chart.

So what are you implying?

[JimboToronto]

I for one welcome our literate bear trolls, Jorge and Notlambchop. Proudhon switches sides too often to really count as a bear troll, and ElectricMucus is just a Bitcoin romantic turned Bitcoin cynic by the greed and general asshattery that became more prevalent in here.

Option 1: They turn out to be right about crypto's failure, and we will one day look back at their posts as wise words of warning. Trollish wise words of warning.

Option 2: More likely, they'll turn out to be wrong, and during the next rally, I will look back at their posts as a source of entertainment (usually), and justified criticism at the time, even if they were phrased to provoke a reaction.

Option 3: none. I don't buy the "anti crypto shill" idea. Trolling is a reward of its own ^_^

Right on. This is why none of them is on my ignore list.

I'm torn between door #2 and door #3 though.

I'm too impatient to wait for door #2 to unfold. I'll enjoy the entertainment now.

As for door #3, trolling is indeed a reward of its own, especially trolling the trolls.