Surely dude, I agree with the overall sentiment of your above post in terms of not getting too tied down to exactness, but you must recognize and appreciate that S2F is not any kind of new model. He was largely taking from various previous models and then extrapolating data to put within another kind of way of expressing similar ideas that were already out there.. and for sure, there is nothing wrong with re-packaging because it will become a wee bit more digestible for a lot of us mere mortal normies (especially some of the less technical, less mathematics, and less science oriented).

Another thing is that the S2F model does not really take into account exponential s-curve adoption based on Metcalfe principles and networking effects, and his model get's criticized based on a failure to account for demand or to even project the demand curve as a kind of upwardly sloping constant (which surely could be a way of saying that the model does attempt to account for exponential s-curve adoption based on Metcalfe principles and networking effects because it presumes a kind of onward and upward trajectory.. while at the same time saying that the historical data (plotting on the lines) actually supports such theory that the demand curve remains onward and upwards - which is similar to what a lot of us presume, and we know (or appreciate) that the future cannot be projected based on future data that has not happened yet.. so any kind of future projection is going to seem somewhat presumptuous since the future has not happened, yet.. hahahahahaha

Another thing that we know is that a lot of shit could end up going haywire, and in that regard, there surely can be some value in NOT having 100% of your eggs in the bitcoin basket.. so even if many of us can appreciate that our odds in bitcoin's future are quite great, we should be careful - and probably more careful if we have things to lose or we might be older or even that we might have some limitations (such as health issues or potential health issues).  Even though I would NOT consider 100% investing to be prudent, I can appreciate that there might be some very young people who could risk putting 100% into bitcoin, and then just considering that they will diversify a wee bit later down the road.. maybe after this cycle or the next one.. perhaps they could get away with such a gamble that seems a bit too much from my perspective of even considering what the youngest of folks should be doing (but they have to decide for themselves).  Oh, and by the way, if someone hardly has a pot to piss in, besides being able to garner up $1k to $20k in value, then perhaps there could be some value in putting 100% into bitcoin.. perhaps? perhaps?