RE: The fallacy of measuring success and failure based on price movements
Don't know if it was in 2013, likely somewhat earlier, but Bitcoin enthusiasts would be probably disappointed, horrified even, to learn that in 2016 fiat currencies still exist. I remember from the time a blog post estimating future value of Bitcoin based on dividing world's GDP by Bitcoin to be available on the blockchain. They expected this somewhat later than now, though.
Now that pipe dreams of destroying fiat statist and whatnot economy are pretty much over, ~$600 seems quite organic, but is it really? It has grown from ~$300 over a very short period, and it may just as easily fall.
As for steem, well, we'll see. Initial success is indubitable, but will it translate into a long term one? And market cap is quite delusive a measure: if everyone decided at once to sell, they wouldn't get the entire market cap together, indeed significantly less. And, above all, it doesn't mean that steem owners have this money available to fund development. In fact, latest actions indicate that they might be quite short instead.
Only those who do not understand the politics involved. The establishment would have no intention to replace their own fiat scam with bitcoin. Most (rational) expectations were that if bitcoin started to oppose the fiat money, it would trigger aggressive reactions (laws / bans).
Perhaps I met only such activists then :-) Obviously you're right.
Yeah, certainly, this was to be expected, but I heard it answered more than once that they cannot do anything about Bitcoin due to crypto. I think it was only the Ulbricht arrest that ended such delusions.
Scam or not, it's not like they would be unable to take Bitcoin over if they'd feel threatened. Bitcoin, interesting as it is, was, is and will likely remain too weak to endanger governmental systems.
Yep, the strength will have to increase over time. Back in '10 Satoshi was fearful that a wikileaks funding campaign with bitcoins would kill bitcoin by attracting wrong attention in such an early stage. Now we are far better off - but still there's a long way to go.
Well I think it's never, unless the govts actually embrace Bitcoin as their legal tender (unlikely). See, it in general reduces to force, and they are the ones who decide how you can e.g. pay taxes or in most cases wages and services. And paid taxes in many a country trump Bitcoin's market cap several times over, and it appears most countries can afford energy enough to take over the blockchain for long enough to make Bitcoin irrelevant if they only wanted.
Yet they don't seem to want to destroy BTC but acknowledge it instead and are taxing profits (in my country it's legal to trade and profits are taxed like trading securities are AFAIK - I don't trade) made therewith.