Biggest Hurdle To Currency Adoption

[stellar1]

I was just reading somewhere that over 70% of BTC in circulation are owned by just about 1.29% of the BTC wallets. This accounts for over 41% of BTC that will ever be created. In contrast the top 1% fiat wallets in the US had about 30% of the nation's currency backed assets.

If this is true (I request our meticulous economists to vet it http://www.dioxidized.com/2014/10/10/bitcoins-wealth-concentration-creates-significant-hurdles-for-those-who-might-consider-adopting-it/ ), how can we expect BTC to become anywhere close to mainstream currency ? I guess BTC distribution among wallets will need to become far more even before any level of mass adoption can begin.

[1714028179]

1714028179

[1714028179]

1714028179

[dothebeats]

Seeing that most of the coins are held by only 1% of the wallets, most people wouldn't get involved in such a currency. The control of that 1% is so great that they can manipulate things into whatever they want to. People nowadays are liberal, and seeing that they can be controlled by only a fraction of the whole, they might as well back off from that.

[stonerider]

Human avarice being what it is, bitcoin will never been a currency of choice for a democratic people. The 99.999% of us will never hold a whole coin in our wallet. F*ck btc. Sell it while you can. Don't be a bag-holder for rich whales and early adopters. Crash, baby, crash!!!

[Possum577]

The 1% of Bitcoin own a great share of bitcoin than the 1% of the Dollar

[disparity]

in the fiat world it is even worse. Now with bitcoin prices low at least we can buy some cheap

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world, Oxfam says

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30875633

[Q7]

Fiat also experience same phenomenon. What's even worse is that if you compare with people who are absolutely bankrupt and those who held billions, what would that tell you? The gap is far wider. Fact is there will never be a fair distribution in this world.

[polynesia]

Given that Bitcoin is divisible to the level of satoshis, we really don't need Bitcoin to be more well-distributed before adoption takes off.

[username18333]

Fiat also experience same phenomenon. What's even worse is that if you compare with people who are absolutely bankrupt and those who held billions, what would that tell you? The gap is far wider. Fact is there will never be a fair distribution in this world.

Baudrillard presents hyperreality as the terminal stage of simulation, where a sign or image has no relation to any reality whatsoever, but is “its own pure simulacrum” (Baudrillard 1994, 6). The real, he says, has become an operational effect of symbolic processes, just as images are technologically generated and coded before we actually perceive them. This means technological mediation has usurped the productive role of the Kantian subject, the locus of an original synthesis of concepts and intuitions, as well as the Marxian worker, the producer of capital though labor, and the Freudian unconscious, the mechanism of repression and desire. “From now on,” says Baudrillard, “signs are exchanged against each other rather than against the real” (Baudrillard 1993, 7), so production now means signs producing other signs. The system of symbolic exchange is therefore no longer real but “hyperreal.” Where the real is “that of which it is possible to provide an equivalent reproduction,” the hyperreal, says Baudrillard, is “that which is always already reproduced” (Baudrillard 1993, 73). The hyperreal is a system of simulation simulating itself.

(Red colorization mine.)

The truth is that the State is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit, but above all to corrupt its citizens… Henceforth, I shall never serve any government anywhere.

Tribe is hyperreal and begets possession. Possession is real and begets money. Money is hyperreal and begets state. State is real and begets hyperreality.

Abolition of state, money, possession, and tribe should fell that hyperreality.

[xmasdobo]

It will always be the same with any currency. First come first serve, and first comers are taking the biggest risk by investing. How do you solve this? How do you aware everyone on a currency and tell all of them to invest so its equal? it makes no sense.

[username18333]

It will always be the same with any currency. First come first serve, and first comers are taking the biggest risk by investing. How do you solve this? How do you aware everyone on a currency and tell all of them to invest so its equal? it makes no sense.

. . .

Great Empire Coin™ (GEC™) is the official currency of Great Empire of Earth and is divisible into cents and mills, and has denominations of mega-, terra-, and exacoins.  Earth (i.e., Great Empire of Earth), being an anarchist despotism (Earth law is licensed to the general public for its [non-mandatory] enforcement thereby), has Writcoin clients serve as one of its heterarchical monetary authorities: anyone may “mint” GE coins; however, the coins have to be “minted” through official channels (e.g., Writcoin) to be guaranteed official recognition.

. . .

Production hails from the one; therefore, a relevant monitor of consumption does so as well.

(Red colorization added.)

[neurotypical]

It will always be the same with any currency. First come first serve, and first comers are taking the biggest risk by investing. How do you solve this? How do you aware everyone on a currency and tell all of them to invest so its equal? it makes no sense.

. . .

Great Empire Coin™ (GEC™) is the official currency of Great Empire of Earth and is divisible into cents and mills, and has denominations of mega-, terra-, and exacoins.  Earth (i.e., Great Empire of Earth), being an anarchist despotism (Earth law is licensed to the general public for its [non-mandatory] enforcement thereby), has Writcoin clients serve as one of its heterarchical monetary authorities: anyone may “mint” GE coins; however, the coins have to be “minted” through official channels (e.g., Writcoin) to be guaranteed official recognition.

. . .

Production hails from the one; therefore, a relevant monitor of consumption does so as well.

(Red colorization added.)

Can you explain what are you talking about specifically? not sure if I want to click on that .onion link. Why is it an onion site?

Also, if you are promoting a coin that is supposed to be perfectly fair, well, we still have the same problem, people will want to amass wealth and the currently wealthy (early investors) will not move to other coin at this point, so the problem persists.

[grendel25]

I think security and ease of use are the biggest hurdles for bitcoin adoption.  Can't really speak for all currencies but these two things stand out and seem like they'd apply to just about any currency.  I think you have to consider your audience in this discussion too.  Regular users of bitcoin understand the risks first hand and may disagree about security being a hurdle.  But you take your average user and I bet they are a lot less willing to dive in when they look at the learning curve.  And there is a pretty big learning curve. 

When someone makes this easier and more secure then it will be in much higher demand.  Especially if bitcoin markets offer competitive deals.

[Q7]

I think security and ease of use are the biggest hurdles for bitcoin adoption.  Can't really speak for all currencies but these two things stand out and seem like they'd apply to just about any currency.  I think you have to consider your audience in this discussion too.  Regular users of bitcoin understand the risks first hand and may disagree about security being a hurdle.  But you take your average user and I bet they are a lot less willing to dive in when they look at the learning curve.  And there is a pretty big learning curve. 

When someone makes this easier and more secure then it will be in much higher demand.  Especially if bitcoin markets offer competitive deals.

I think when it comes to ease of use, it's not a major hurdle. Compared with those day when you only have a handful of programs, nowadays you can easily find HD wallet, multisig feature which are becoming a norm. Take for example electrum. It's easy to use with its minimalistic feature and when it comes to security, there's nothing short or anything.

[username18333]

. . .

Can you explain what are you talking about specifically? not sure if I want to click on that .onion link. Why is it an onion site?

Also, if you are promoting a coin that is supposed to be perfectly fair, well, we still have the same problem, people will want to amass wealth and the currently wealthy (early investors) will not move to other coin at this point, so the problem persists.

1. "[T]he official currency of Great Empire of Earth" (username18333).

2. Ask the Despot.

3. Business answers to government, not government to business.

[stellar1]

Let me add by way of replies to some of the responses and a little bit new insight

1 Please feel free to share a believable research that has proven that holding distribution of any worthwile fiat currency is less even than that of BTC

2 Compare that 100 subunits of any fiat currency (which is a norm) with the million (and more) subunits of BTC ....possible the proponents have aimed at a 1 million USD valuation for BTC.

3 Add to 2 the valuation range of BTC (so far) ranging from USD 0.01 to USD 1200+

4 Add the half hearted efforts driving mass adoption (so far) and the learning curve (maybe deliberately designed to be esoteric like all contraptions made by outright techies) trying to use BTC

And the conclusion I seem to reach is BTC was never designed or intended to be a currency like the US Dollar (or any other fiat) is. The talk that goes on otherwise seems to be either lip service or another half-hearted effort; or another attempt to gain in the use value of BTC.

Agree ?

[username18333]

Bitcoin wouldn’t be popular for the same reason those less socio-economically “well off” advocate for inflationary currencies: while incomes shrink, debts grow.

[botany]

in the fiat world it is even worse. Now with bitcoin prices low at least we can buy some cheap

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world, Oxfam says

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30875633

This is true. Even if you have an uniform distribution, over time diesparities will emerge.
The early adopters have been rewarded for being to foresee the advantages of Bitcoin.

[manselr]

in the fiat world it is even worse. Now with bitcoin prices low at least we can buy some cheap

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world, Oxfam says

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30875633

This is true. Even if you have an uniform distribution, over time diesparities will emerge.
The early adopters have been rewarded for being to foresee the advantages of Bitcoin.

Thats what a lot of people don't get. No such thing as uniform distribution, its ridiculous. You have to take risks if you want bigger rewards.

[Criterion]

in the fiat world it is even worse. Now with bitcoin prices low at least we can buy some cheap

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world, Oxfam says

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30875633

So even though the early adopters had a considerable advantage it's by no means a hurdle that can't be overcome. But only time will tell.

[BillyBobZorton]

in the fiat world it is even worse. Now with bitcoin prices low at least we can buy some cheap

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world, Oxfam says

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30875633

So even though the early adopters had a considerable advantage it's by no means a hurdle that can't be overcome. But only time will tell.

Its the only way for things to work. The game is rigged in Fiat, the game is not rigged in Bitcoin. In bitcoin you get risk->reward proportionated, in fiat bernakle and friends create money when they need to infinitely.