http://www.bankofcanada.ca/2014/08/working-paper-2014-33/My interpretation on this research and on other evidence is that the network effect we see in Facebook and Microsoft Windows may be the result of government interference in the form of favoritism rather than some natural economic trend. Governments give advantages to corporations that are their friends and this supersedes the free market.
I'm not entirely certain if network effect or first mover advantage provide a competitive edge in an entirely free market without governments picking winners and losers but if anyone can show me some network effect examples then I might change my mind.
In the case of cryptocurrencies I don't see why network effect or first mover advantages would take hold when less than 1% of the global population has tried cryptocurrency. The tipping point for spreading an idea is 10% and we are perhaps decades away from that.
http://news.rpi.edu/luwakkey/2902So it could be that Bitcoin is only in the lead with people who have specific political views and that it will not remain in the lead 5 years from now when the rest of the world gets on board. I'm convinced the world wants cryptocurrency but not everyone is an anarchist and even amongst ourselves we don't all consider ourselves anarchists. Minarchists for example are popular around here.
What happens when statists start using cryptocurrency? Is the slow adoption rate a sign that the majority of the people in the world are authoritarian statists who don't care about privacy or freedom?
Topic: First mover advantage may be a myth, new research (Read 1142 times)
