> Not until they can really explain to the average Joe why cryptocurrencies are such a good thing.

"Look at all these people getting rich without any work, you can too! Just buy this convenient financial product I happen to be selling!"

I'd have hoped the mania would die out once the supply of people with technical skills was exhausted, but it looks like people are hard at work extending the bottom of the pyramid to cover the usual victims.

bitcoin is an open source C++ computer program that created a deflationary currency that somehow was able to be seen as intrinsic value to the market, its impressive the emotions it brings out of people like you. I believe from a software standpoint, it functions better than some other software projects I've seen, so it is fun to see where this is going to go in the future

> people like you

People with common sense? Governments (the institutions that get to use guns and jails and make laws) will not let their control of currency slide out from under them. Blockchains are cool and fun and applicable, but I can't see crypto-currency-as-money becoming mainstream. Even if it does the governments of the world will not adopt Bitcoin, they would make their own.

Much more likely it will be outlawed or go the way of the beanie baby. Optimistically it could remain as a financial instrument on some sort, but IMO the only reason people value btc at all is because they think it will "go mainstream". When this doesn't happen either by legislation or force the value will disappear, and with that its utility will as well.

Bitcoin is already outlawed in some countries, like Venezuela. How do you think law can stop something so important that the governments don't provide?

We'll talk when access to Bitcoin is considered a basic human right

Cryptolocker is "just" a C++ computer program too, it is technically interesting and variants are getting increasingly sophisticated. That doesn't mean I can't see that economically it's a negative sum game wasting massive amounts of value in order to enrich a few.

They don't really need to explain it in any real sense. A bank creates Wells-coin, then a bunch of their sales people go out and start talking to clients about how this is the new thing, show a nice returns chart for ETH and BTC, talk about "decentralization" and "blockchain" and how this is the future, do you wanna hop on? Traditional investments already fly over the heads of most people and yet they still have 401ks and IRAs. My problem is that these cryptocoins are so incredibly volatile that there's no way laymen should be invested in them.

While it may be true that it is hard to explain to the average Joe what the value of cryptocurrency is versus their native fiat currency - it is less true for your "average Juan."

> and trying to market cryptocurrencies as 'independent from government control' is likely a losing proposition

Seems to be winning in China. I'm sure other countries with strict capital controls will experience similar things.

Joe will probably be the last one to join the crypto takeover - but he'll still have exposure via pension funds and ETFs.

I think governments portraying crypto as being for "criminals" is the equivalent of marketing a truck as "military strength".

>why cryptocurrencies are such a good thing

What if they aren't such a good thing?

How about the fact that paying with something like Bitcoin is (energy) inefficient, inconvenient and slow?

Cash is still more anonymous than cryptocurrencies.

The anonymity is overrated anyway. At some point you want to turn your currency into tangible benefit like food or a car or drugs or whatever. At that point it isn't hard to connect the anonymous wallet with the guy who bought the new Ferrari out of thin air.

If you spent it all on drugs it would be anonymous.

That really depends on the amount.

Are they logical? What are they?

triple entry accounting, so i heard ;)