Quote from: bitserve on February 16, 2018, 10:57:49 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 16, 2018, 10:53:06 PM

Quote from: bitserve on February 16, 2018, 09:54:01 PM

Quote from: Wekkel on February 16, 2018, 09:30:23 PM

In terms of awareness it is probably 1998 but adoption wise it is probably around 1995 with just the university kids on the Net. Cool colleagues have just started trading crypto but the rest is still ignoring it. Some probably will the rest of their lives Grin

It makes sense. Almost everybody has already heard of Bitcoin the same as Internet in 95-97. But way less than 1% got/use, so it is 93-95 in that.

Also in terms of development it is like when we only had telnet, ftp, email and irc (I always considered gopher useless).... and everything was command line/shell only.

It was the development of HTPP what transformed it into something "ready" for mainstream people.

I think we still lack that "http" of Bitcoin... but LN is surely a step in the right direction.

And it was major players like AOL what helped in its adoption... I am not sure Bitcoin already have its "AOL" or if we could consider Coinbase to be the equivalent.

I thought that bitcoin is the HTTP.. and everything get's built upon bitcoin.. no?

No. HTTP is a higher layer (lower than HTML though). Bitcoin/Blockchain is more like TCP/IP (it's just an analogy).

Higher layers are the next step towards user ergonomy. We need more of those in which blockchain would be just an underlaying transparent lower level layer.... and "Bitcoin" will be *ALL* that.

Maybe even some additional layers in which BTC is converted to "stable" DIGITAL fiat via sidechain atomic swaps.

O.k.... Your earlier point makes more sense, now. Thanks for the ELI5 clarification, which is good for me, and may help out some others too with these ongoing assertions of fitting analogies.