The fatal flaw in this comment writer's reasoning is that he approaches it from the perspective of technologist who likes Bitcoin.

The term "borderless currency" is a misnomer. The dollar is widely accepted in many countries, hence is as borderless as any cryptocurrency.

Perhaps the writer really means "not backed or governed by any government", which does describe Bitcoin. It is controlled, not by a government, but by an un-elected clique of individuals who oversee a small number of mining pools and software development.

I wonder what the comment writer thinks readers would expect would be the locations where Bitcoin has the highest search activity? Over the past year, stable countries dominate the list. More recently less stable countries will periodically jump to the top, but this is because searches for Bitcoin in the more stable countries have plummeted so dramatically since late 2017. Even in these less stable countries, the search activity is almost always now far less than it was during the the great price runup. It is generally lower than that for Euro or dollars, which people are more familiar with and less likely to need google to learn about.

Even if we accept the claims of the great increase in Bitcoin transactions in Venezeula--the increase is from near zero. In Venezuela, which has suffered high inflation for years, the current claimed exchange volume represents about 1/1,000 of its shrinking GDP, even though it has been used to steal free electricity for mining. Even Nathaniel Popper, a journalist and author who follows and has been favorable towards Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies a acknowledged in a tweet "...I would think that more people in crypto should be asking why Venezuelans haven't turned to Bitcoin.." . See https://twitter.com/nathanielpopper/status/1042887245202505728

As I mentioned in response to earlier comments, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies' only potential advantage to people in unstable countries is that the usage is so unsubstantial the governments might not bother restricting it. At the first hint of it becoming a threat, the government crackdowns will relegate it to the same black markets where other banned currencies trades. There it will be at a great disadvantage to currencies whose value is steadied by their heavy usage in stable countries.

The "low barriers to entry" is a major misconception. I am presuming the writer is referring to whether one can use Bitcoin without an intermediary; because when one goes through the banking system, bitcoin has no advantage over regular currencies.

The claim that Bitcoin can be used without an intermediary is from the perspective of the small minority of people with great technical knowledge. The average person would have to learn how to acquire and maintain the right software and protect the Bitcoin private keys from loss or theft. Even the elite group of technologists has found it challenging to avoid losing Bitcoins to hacks and mistakes. Almost all users and speculators go through intermediaries like Coinbase.

The shift in the dominant driver of bitcoin promotion and usage from adoption as a currency to "store of value" or the arrival of institutional investors indicates that few who understand monetary economics have bought into the idea that Bitcoin is a true global currency.