With transaction costs rising above $1 the original promise of cheap remittance using Bitcoin is officially dead. Without utility Bitcoin use is limited to speculation only and even further what is there to speculate about?
I would like to debate this and gauge the community's response to Bitcoin experiment.
I think that bitcoin failed his first intent, the original intent was to be a digital money. Here is what Satoshi Nakamoto said in the original whitepaper:
"The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the
minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions,
and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for nonreversible
services. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads. Merchants must
be wary of their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need.
A certain percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable. These costs and payment uncertainties
can be avoided in person by using physical currency, but no mechanism exists to make payments
over a communications channel without a trusted party" (Satoshi Nakamoto)
I highlight this part "The cost of mediation increases transaction costs", Bitcoin has become what he fought against
For those that don't believe that alcoins can replace Bitcoin take a look in the market dominance of Bitcoin.
Now Bitcoin is becoming each day more and more the Debian of the digital currencies but it can be the next blockbuster/kodak.
As much as I would like to agree with you. Having failed as a remittance mechanism or a good store of value, I'm struggling to see the value of the Bitcoin as an asset class. It can't be used for high value settlement, it's not enough volume. It's destined to remain niche with limited attraction from speculators. The uptick in popularity we are seeing now is driven by a lack of understanding and a short-term desire to make quick buck.