Isn't it a mostly unavoidable characteristic of p2p distributed systems (when they're not introduced top down by governments) that they grow from "practically zero users" to (maybe) mass adoption?
I'd think that it's almost inherent for any currency like technology that - over the course of its adoption process - the value goes through various phases of increase. At least for currencies with deflationary supply.
There might be blockchain based cryptocurrencies out there that try to prevent early adopters from becoming excessively rich mostly out of luck, but apparently these alternatives lack the incentive to even get to wide adoption.
Yes, early adopters would become unfairly rich, were bitcoin to make it to wide adoption ... but something makes me hope that a btc wealth distribution with Gini coefficient close to 1 would be a temporary thing. A phase that the whole thing would pass through towards a less unequal distribution, where the increase in value and thus the aspect of speculation would become less relevant and the aspect of btc as a payment system or value store would become more relevant.
I'd think that it's almost inherent for any currency like technology that - over the course of its adoption process - the value goes through various phases of increase. At least for currencies with deflationary supply.
There might be blockchain based cryptocurrencies out there that try to prevent early adopters from becoming excessively rich mostly out of luck, but apparently these alternatives lack the incentive to even get to wide adoption.
Yes, early adopters would become unfairly rich, were bitcoin to make it to wide adoption ... but something makes me hope that a btc wealth distribution with Gini coefficient close to 1 would be a temporary thing. A phase that the whole thing would pass through towards a less unequal distribution, where the increase in value and thus the aspect of speculation would become less relevant and the aspect of btc as a payment system or value store would become more relevant.