Five years ago, bitcoin was an problematic and enigmatic online currency, used by few and accepted by fewer. Today, after half a decade of sturm, drang, and drama—not to discuss multi-million dollar hacks and grandiose proclamations—it is … an problematic and enigmatic online currency, used by few and accepted by fewer. Despite a breathless prophecies of large pundits, conjunction genocide nor series have come to pass.
But it would be wrong to perspective these past few years as small stagnation, as Paul Vigna does in a recent Wall Street Journal piece, arguing that “hacks and a irrevocable inlet of exchange mount in a approach of broader acceptance.” At a finish of a day, Vigna asks, “Is [bitcoin] unequivocally a improved mousetrap?”
Despite a breathless prophecies of large pundits, conjunction genocide nor series have come to pass. It’s a reasonable question. Bitcoin’s stream complement might worry some-more mainstream banking business used to a certain turn of institutional accountability. But it’s myopic to concentration only on a present. As we speak, developers are proposing new, some-more permitted structures that could, in a nearby future, emanate a Bitcoin 2.0 that is both savoury to the