<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Matt wrote</title><author_name>Matt (npub1l6…uj5rc)</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.now/npub1l6scds4yv7xmcsmhqnhdy9sggm520q09lvts2m5mkvecgr2mmmeqsuj5rc</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.now</provider_url><html>Call it whatever you want. It isnt like other technologies haven&#39;t taken similar routes. We just expect everything to happen right now because we&#39;re so spoiled.&#xA;&#xA;Here are some things that took longer for mass adoption than Bitcoin has even existed for. You&#39;ve probably heard of some of them:&#xA;&#xA;Electricity&#xA;Flushing toilets&#xA;Automobiles&#xA;Commercial internet&#xA;Telephones&#xA;Radio&#xA;TV&#xA;Fax&#xA;&#xA;Infrastructure was probably a hangup for most of those. And I think the current issue is an infrastructure one too. Except there&#39;s already an existing infrastructure that half the world can access. They don&#39;t yet realize there&#39;s a better option. Other people are, just not those you think should be.&#xA;&#xA;It&#39;s also pretty common for new technologies to have fluctuations in adoption rates. And you&#39;re presupposing that &#34;adoption&#34; means what you think it should mean. My point is that it may not be and may shift.&#xA;&#xA;I&#39;m just trying to put aside my bullish biases. When I do, I see similarities to other things and admittedly don&#39;t like the implication. But that doesn&#39;t mean it&#39;s cope or untrue. And there&#39;s no law that says adoption must go my way at the pace I think it should. It&#39;s being used, whether or not I like how.</html></oembed>