🧨 What If Bitcoin Shouldn’t Be for Everyone?

For years, we’ve repeated the mantra:
“Bitcoin is for everyone.”
But… what if it’s not?

What if some people simply don’t need it, won’t understand it, or — worse — will use it to strengthen the very systems Bitcoin was built to replace?

🧠 Some uncomfortable thoughts:

Bitcoin is not easy.
It takes time, discipline, and a mindset of radical self-responsibility — things many people simply aren’t willing to embrace.
Not everyone wants to give up fiat comforts.
Some prefer the illusion of safety: state guarantees, banks they can call, and insurance when things go wrong. Bitcoin doesn’t offer any of that.
Mass adoption could dilute its core principles.
If Bitcoin turns into just another “decentralized PayPal,” do we lose the cypherpunk soul?
What happens when politicians, bureaucrats, and megacorps join the party?
Are they adopting Bitcoin... or taming it?

🎯 So here’s the question:

Should we stop saying “Bitcoin is for everyone”?
Or is that ideal exactly what makes it revolutionary?

Should we accept that not everyone will get Bitcoin — and that maybe… that’s okay?

As one old-school Bitcoiner once said:

“Bitcoin doesn’t need to convince anyone. It just needs to be there when the system fails.”

💬 What do you think?

Should Bitcoin be for everyone, even if many misuse it?
Or is it better for Bitcoin to stay for those who are truly ready?

Looking forward to the debate… and maybe a few zaps ⚡

view all related items

39 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 8h

“Bitcoin is for everyone” doesn’t just have one simple meaning. It also means that no one can be excluded from it. That’s the powerful part of the OG’s quote: Bitcoin will be there for everyone, whenever they realize they need it. A global outside option is incredibly powerful.

14 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 9h

It should be for everyone. It might not end up going that way though.

It's too early to tell if sats can become THE medium of exchange throughout the world.

There could be a situation where sats are under the hood, like in some pension fund. The person has no idea he/she has exposure to bitcoin.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @justin_shocknet 7h

It's for anyone, not everyone.

The supply distribution alone limits sovereign utility to, at most, a billion people.

Anyone that tells you it can be scaled beyond this with some new cryptotheatrics is lying, even if to themselves, because when people want the impossible only liars can satisfy.

Everyone else will use it through some form of human organization (trust). Bitcoin does not exist to obviate all human organization. However, even if its not for everyone, it is everyone who benefits by the check and balance of such a neutral and hard money simply existing. Trust is now bespoke.

17 sats \ 1 reply \ @halalmoney 7h

How do you keep coming up with these useful insights?! Hard not to resist copying to nostr!

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 6h

I think its just a combination of time and focus, being focused on one thing for a long time lets you think about it from all angles and eventually the pieces fit.

Lots of these truths are uncomfortable to me particularly, because MoE was my path to discovery and where I am most capable of providing value. I've been idealistic (and thus wrong) enough times to see things for what they are and not what I want them to be.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 9h

Very similar question: #342798

Should Bitcoin be for everyone, even if many misuse it?

It won't be very wise to stop using Bitcoin (or anything) if some hipsters misuse it.

Or is it better for Bitcoin to stay for those who are truly ready?

Ultimately it's gonna be for everyone.