Sounds to me if our fight for bitcoin is to stop Ethereum all together and support Counterparty and Sidechains
https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/20/bitcoin-maximalism-currency-platform-network-effects/First, an introduction to the technical strategies at hand. In general, there are three approaches to creating a new crypto protocol:
Build on Bitcoin the blockchain, but not Bitcoin the currency (metacoins, eg. most features of Counterparty)
Build on Bitcoin the currency, but not Bitcoin the blockchain (sidechains)
Create a completely standalone platform
When discussing currency network effects, he completely missed the big one: the network effect of the ledger. He talked about network effects of currency, but not about store of value.
This whole Bitcoin thing has been about
getting yourself on the universal ledger of civilization. That is why people invest. That is why people support it. That is why it's a big deal. Yet it's like he has no idea that is even a thing. He's fallen for the subtle confusion that Bitcoin is a "currency," when the reality is that Bitcoin avoids the need for currency in the first place since it's a direct ledger.
The closest he came is this part:
Unit of account network effect (very large currencies become units of account, leading to more purchasing power stability via price stickiness as well as higher salience) unfortunately, Bitcoin will likely never be stable enough to trigger this effect; the best empirical evidence we can see for this is likely the valuation history of gold.
But this isn't really the same thing as store of value - the idea that arises in society that "we will use this ledger (or a commodity substitute) to keep track of debts from now on, by convention."
This is why the ledger concept really has to be understood, and understood on the deepest level, to avoid falling into silliness of various kinds. It's impossible to fully understand Bitcoin if you continue to think of it at as a currency rather than as a ledger, and this is just one more example.