4 ms·

It's still early days. It's like asking if the goals of the Internet are dead because most people log-in via AOL and browse only AOL curated content. Crypto ad

It's still early days. It's like asking if the goals of the Internet are dead because most people log-in via AOL and browse only AOL curated content. Crypto adoption is still at a very low percentage in the United States. Imagine one day when _most_ people own crypto, and are willing to transact in it, and there is more advanced tooling and software and understanding. What will the world look like then? As a specific example, take a look at the 0x protocol, and the many relayers that are building on top of it like Radar Relay or Dy/Dx. 0x and these companies are tying to build exchanges that let you trade alts with zero counter-party risk. The trade occurs via on-chain smart contracts. The above could all fail; I'm not saying it _will_ happen. Just that it's too early to declare the original vision dead. And as sibling commentators have noted, even today one can easily send BTC peer-to-peer once you have some without any intermediaries.

spookthesunset 9y ago
> It's still early days. Bitcoin is 10 years old... hardly the "early days" in tech.
- Klathmon 9y ago
  And depending on when you define the "launch" of the internet, it's 10 year anniversary was in 1999, square in the AOL timeperiod that the parent comment was talking about.
  - edanm 9y ago
    I know you put launch in quotes, but just to emphasize - the internet was launched much earlier than 1989 in terms of the technology. The base technology was worked on in the 60s and 70s, and things like email were already in use in the 70s and early 80s. Of course, digital cash has been worked on for many years too, but if you compare the bitcoin whitepaper to, say, the TCP/IP RFC, then you'd expect AOL-comparable bitcoin usage in 2030, more or less.
    - spookthesunset 9y ago
      If you compare this underwater spacetravel whitepaper I wrote in 2008 to, say, the TCP/IP RFC, then you'd also expect AOL-comparable underwater space travel usage in 2030, more or less.
  - jonny_eh 9y ago
    The internet already proved itself to be quite useful by then. I still see no _legit_ uses for cryptocurrencies, 10 years in.
    - disgruntledphd2 9y ago
      A wildly speculative investment in an era of really low (in fact somewhat negative) interest rates? I mean we have a global asset bubble in general, it's not surprising that some of it is spilling into new and untested stores of value, i suppose. I agree that current crypto-currency ecosystems are pretty insane, but the original idea was super-cool.
      - perl4ever 9y ago
        Every traditional investment seems to be getting safer and lower in return, so there's all this capital looking for something better...and it's like people assume that high return and high risk go together, so let's invent stuff that has artificially created risk! I was listening to someone who said it's like the opposite of what led to the financial crisis, where they were repackaging risky investments into ostensibly safe derivatives. Now we're creating risky investments out of nothing because we don't seem to have enough risk these days...
  - perl4ever 9y ago
    AOL's heyday was more like '93. By 95-96, connecting directly to the internet was becoming explosively popular and everyone was starting an ISP. Source: first hand experience.
- chatmasta 9y ago
  ARPANet was around long before AOL.
- Sargos 9y ago
  And technically the "dot com boom" happened 30 years after the invention of the internet. So even by your strange standard we are still in early days.
shkkmo 9y ago
> Imagine one day when _most_ people own crypto, and are willing to transact in it, It doesn't really seem we are moving in that direction. While more people know about bitcoin and more people own bitcoin, it seems like the number of people willing to transact in it has made no progress. > It's like asking if the goals of the Internet are dead because most people log-in via AOL and browse only AOL curated content. Arguably, the original goals and design of the Internet ARE dead (or not dead, but certainly not dominant or ascendant). While the AOL business model may have failed, similar closed systems have dominated most of the content and use of the internet. The number of people who build their own sites on any topic or even publish blogs vs. the number of people who post to Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat is pretty tiny. Open federated chat clients have been mostly replace by closed, proprietary systems. > The above could all fail; I'm not saying it _will_ happen. Just that it's too early to declare the original vision dead. While it may be too early to declare it dead. Your analogy to the internet seems like a strong argument to be concerned that the vision is dying.
- kelnos 9y ago
  > While more people know about bitcoin and more people own bitcoin, it seems like the number of people willing to transact in it has made no progress. I'd say in some cases there have been regressions. Many indie-type groups have stopped accepting Bitcoin due to its volatility and high transaction fees. Stripe has announced its support for Bitcoin will end late April. Certainly there's the possibility that things will calm down and it will bounce back, but personally I'm pretty bearish.

spookthesunset 9y ago

> It's still early days. Bitcoin is 10 years old... hardly the "early days" in tech.

Klathmon 9y ago
And depending on when you define the "launch" of the internet, it's 10 year anniversary was in 1999, square in the AOL timeperiod that the parent comment was talking about.
- edanm 9y ago
  I know you put launch in quotes, but just to emphasize - the internet was launched much earlier than 1989 in terms of the technology. The base technology was worked on in the 60s and 70s, and things like email were already in use in the 70s and early 80s. Of course, digital cash has been worked on for many years too, but if you compare the bitcoin whitepaper to, say, the TCP/IP RFC, then you'd expect AOL-comparable bitcoin usage in 2030, more or less.
  - spookthesunset 9y ago
    If you compare this underwater spacetravel whitepaper I wrote in 2008 to, say, the TCP/IP RFC, then you'd also expect AOL-comparable underwater space travel usage in 2030, more or less.
- jonny_eh 9y ago
  The internet already proved itself to be quite useful by then. I still see no _legit_ uses for cryptocurrencies, 10 years in.
  - disgruntledphd2 9y ago
    A wildly speculative investment in an era of really low (in fact somewhat negative) interest rates? I mean we have a global asset bubble in general, it's not surprising that some of it is spilling into new and untested stores of value, i suppose. I agree that current crypto-currency ecosystems are pretty insane, but the original idea was super-cool.
    - perl4ever 9y ago
      Every traditional investment seems to be getting safer and lower in return, so there's all this capital looking for something better...and it's like people assume that high return and high risk go together, so let's invent stuff that has artificially created risk! I was listening to someone who said it's like the opposite of what led to the financial crisis, where they were repackaging risky investments into ostensibly safe derivatives. Now we're creating risky investments out of nothing because we don't seem to have enough risk these days...
- perl4ever 9y ago
  AOL's heyday was more like '93. By 95-96, connecting directly to the internet was becoming explosively popular and everyone was starting an ISP. Source: first hand experience.
chatmasta 9y ago
ARPANet was around long before AOL.
Sargos 9y ago
And technically the "dot com boom" happened 30 years after the invention of the internet. So even by your strange standard we are still in early days.

shkkmo 9y ago

> Imagine one day when _most_ people own crypto, and are willing to transact in it, It doesn't really seem we are moving in that direction. While more people know about bitcoin and more people own bitcoin, it seems like the number of people willing to transact in it has made no progress. > It's like asking if the goals of the Internet are dead because most people log-in via AOL and browse only AOL curated content. Arguably, the original goals and design of the Internet ARE dead (or not dead, but certainly not dominant or ascendant). While the AOL business model may have failed, similar closed systems have dominated most of the content and use of the internet. The number of people who build their own sites on any topic or even publish blogs vs. the number of people who post to Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat is pretty tiny. Open federated chat clients have been mostly replace by closed, proprietary systems. > The above could all fail; I'm not saying it _will_ happen. Just that it's too early to declare the original vision dead. While it may be too early to declare it dead. Your analogy to the internet seems like a strong argument to be concerned that the vision is dying.

kelnos 9y ago
> While more people know about bitcoin and more people own bitcoin, it seems like the number of people willing to transact in it has made no progress. I'd say in some cases there have been regressions. Many indie-type groups have stopped accepting Bitcoin due to its volatility and high transaction fees. Stripe has announced its support for Bitcoin will end late April. Certainly there's the possibility that things will calm down and it will bounce back, but personally I'm pretty bearish.