CoinDesk’s Consensus conference, in partnership with the MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative, has announced 50 “diversity” scholarships reserved specifically for women and people of color. Women and minorities who wish to attend the conference for free have until tomorrow to fill out the application form; others are not eligible.
There is little question that bitcoin’s early user base has been dominated by white males aged roughly 18–34. Nearly every survey on the topic has pointed to this demographic trend, even when the data collection methods are imperfect. Anecdotal experience at meetups and conferences also reflects a scene reminiscent of early-to-mid-1990s computer gatherings—largely white and male.
Against that backdrop, the scholarship program—which covers admission and includes a mentorship session during lunch—is an attempt to increase diversity within the bitcoin community. Outside of the debate over whether a private organization should take this step rather than a public body, it’s fair to call this one of the first instances of affirmative action aimed at the bitcoin space.
That said, the internet itself launched with a similar imbalance. In 2000, 38.4% of U.S. households identifying as White or Non-Hispanic White had a computer with internet access at home, compared with only 14.7% for Black households and 12.8% for Hispanic households (Asians were at 35.2%). While usage was more gender-balanced than bitcoin is today, internet users as a whole lacked diversity.
Over time the disparity narrowed. A digital divide still exists between white and Asian households on one side and Black and Hispanic households on the other, but much of that gap has become a question of convenience: minorities are more likely to access the internet primarily via mobile phones rather than desktop computers. Even so, more than 90% of Blacks and Hispanics in the United States access the internet through either a computer or both a computer and a phone, with fewer than 10% relying solely on handheld devices.
Bitcoin today mirrors the internet’s early demographics in many ways. The internet’s lesson, however, is that the best way to address such gaps is to raise overall access and adoption, not to focus solely on lifting the lowest percentages. If efforts to narrow the 2000 gap had come at the expense of the internet’s broad growth, would that have led to greater long-term parity? The evidence suggests broad growth benefits everyone.
That makes the Consensus scholarships understandable and commendable, even if I view them as a well-intentioned but somewhat misdirected attempt. Offering free tickets and mentoring to women and minorities is not malicious and can help individuals who otherwise could not attend. It may feel slightly patronizing or symbolic to some, but it is one of the practical tools event organizers can use to encourage attendance and should be applauded for opening the door to those who might not afford high ticket prices.
Still, I don’t believe handing out conference passes is the most effective way to broaden bitcoin’s user base. Bitcoin is a global currency; for meaningful diversity we need adoption to expand beyond the United States, Europe, and China. The largest opportunity lies in the unbanked and underbanked populations of South America, Africa, and other regions where remittances and high banking fees make alternative systems attractive.
Adoption in many of these regions has lagged for the same reason internet access lagged there: services are not accessible or affordable for the poor. Critics sometimes claim bitcoin is only useful to the wealthy who can tolerate volatile prices, but that’s not universally true. Many people who are not wealthy—including some who live paycheck to paycheck—use bitcoin daily. However, being “first-world poor” is different from lacking basic internet access; those in many parts of the developing world often face unreliable connectivity, expensive banking, and limited ways to convert bitcoin to local currency.
That last point—difficulty exchanging bitcoins for local currency—is the largest barrier to meaningful adoption in many developing countries. Third-party bitcoin services naturally concentrate on markets with established infrastructure and revenue potential. As a result, bitcoin is often least effective where it could make the most difference.
Solving that problem would not only increase global bitcoin adoption but also reduce the “white nerd” stereotype associated with the community. Instead of targeting minority groups in the U.S. through a limited scholarship program, shifting focus to build accessibility and liquidity in regions with large, underserved populations would likely yield broader diversity. Cheap, easy, and widely available access—approaching free in some cases—matters far more to mainstream and low-income users than niche outreach events.
There are promising examples. In Kenya, the existing mobile payments ecosystem built around M-Pesa created a platform on which bitcoin experiments have been able to build. But most countries lack similar infrastructure, and many bitcoin companies have been unwilling or unable to invest in the offline and on-the-ground systems that would enable real adoption.
One possible workaround is to leverage informal, cash-based exchange networks that already trade major currencies and facilitate remittances. If bitcoin services could integrate with or empower those local peer-to-peer markets, it might create practical entry points for people who currently cannot use bitcoin. I don’t have a simple blueprint for making that happen, but solving it would address bitcoin’s usability and diversity challenges while helping economically marginalized communities.
So while the Consensus scholarships are a positive gesture and help a number of individuals attend a major industry event, they are unlikely to change the broader demographic stereotype. A more impactful approach would be to focus on usability, local liquidity, and infrastructure—making bitcoin inexpensive and easy to use for everyone, particularly in regions where banking services are costly or scarce. Bringing in a few currency sellers from developing markets to participate in conferences might be more effective than offering a few dozen local conference tickets, but the core goal remains the same: improve bitcoin’s accessibility worldwide, and diversity will follow.
If you found this article valuable, donations in bitcoin are welcome. Even a small amount helps support content creation. 1 mBTC is less than $0.25 at today’s prices and every contribution helps. Click here to donate or use the QR code in one of the banners above.