What features of Bitcoin would you never give up?

[sabreok]

Decentralization > Pseudonymous > 21m Coin Limit > Permissionless > Fast

How much activity do you have to have to be able to vote in polls?

[unamis76]

Wouldn't give up any of those listed, but I think the most important ones are the 21 million coin limit, Decentralisation, Pseudonymous, Mining (PoW) and Irreversible. i think these are the 5 pillars I can stand out between the list.

[flix]

Let's imagine that all the Bitcoin devs were arrested by a tyrannical government or bought by an evil mega-corp and forced to change a fundamental aspect of Bitcoin.

Open source doesn't work like that. The code is OSS and anyone is able to modify it and fork it. Current developers (be it Core, XT or whatever) have no more control of it than anyone else. In the end it's always the network that decides. The control is decentralized and collective.

Only way that some goverment could have it's way is if majority of network accepted it or stubbornly kept running a client that is under govt. control. But at any time they would be free to choose otherwise.

You are right of course... the point of this exercise is to determine what features users consider fundamental to Bitcoin's nature. If that is clear enough, it could prevent forks that endanger those features. Or in the case of technical issues where outcomes are more uncertain, it tells developers what user priorities are.

[maokoto]

I voted for the 21 million limit and the Pow. Being part of something "limited" and the ability to get Bitcoins off from mining was what took me first in.

[Herbert2020]

if bitcoin were to change or be replaced, i would never give up features like decentralization, Pseudonymous, and the speed of the transactions.
the only thing that i wish to see change, is the time it takes for transactions to get confirmation.

[VCLChief]

What I would never give up it the fact the chain is leading, no more obscurity in coins/money and making it out of thin air only to profit the banks. One coin is one coin, never more never less. We should be aware that storing coins in exchanges and with other companies like xapo will again bring forth more coins than there actualy are. If I store my coins on an exchange, they can use my coins to do whatever they like. Spend it somewhere else and still claim that I have those coins in my deposit account. It is the banks all over again. Back to the stoneage for the economic revolution... 

This^^

[pedrog]

almost everything you mentioned except proof of work, it may be developed a better method to secure the network and proof of work can be phased out, I guess.

[QuantumQrack]

I would remove Fungibility, bitcoin is the antithesis of fungibility.

[gentlemand]

It would be an interesting poll if it were reversed. What would you be happiest to give up?

It would be PoW for me. If there was a way for Bitcoin to operate without mining I think that would clear up a lot of problems and distortions. There ain't so I'm not going to sweat it.

[pedrog]

I would remove Fungibility, bitcoin is the antithesis of fungibility.

How so?

Every bitcoin is worth the same.

[gentlemand]

I would remove Fungibility, bitcoin is the antithesis of fungibility.

How so?

Every bitcoin is worth the same.

Maybe his dictionary has been tampered with. If there's no fungibility then there isn't much else either.

[pedrog]

I would remove Fungibility, bitcoin is the antithesis of fungibility.

How so?

Every bitcoin is worth the same.

Maybe his dictionary has been tampered with. If there's no fungibility then there isn't much else either.

I know some people pay higher than market value for "freshly" mined bitcoins, bitcoins without a transaction history, but because of this saying bitcoins are not fungible is a big stretch...

[onemorexmr]

I would remove Fungibility, bitcoin is the antithesis of fungibility.

How so?

Every bitcoin is worth the same.

sadly no:
through blockchain analysis its possible to see which coins where stolen.
would you buy them for the same price?

as soon as you put them in an exchange you account will get locked...

(thats the only reason i think coins like xmr have a chance in the future)

[pedrog]

I would remove Fungibility, bitcoin is the antithesis of fungibility.

How so?

Every bitcoin is worth the same.

sadly no:
through blockchain analysis its possible to see which coins where stolen.
would you buy them for the same price?

as soon as you put them in an exchange you account will get locked...

(thats the only reason i think coins like xmr have a chance in the future)

Have you ever made an analysis of your bitcoins or the bitcoins you have received from an exchange or any other service?

You'll probably will find a small percentage can be traced to the bicoinica hack, or some other hack and yet you're still free.

Can you show an example where what you claimed has actually happened?

[onemorexmr]

I would remove Fungibility, bitcoin is the antithesis of fungibility.

How so?

Every bitcoin is worth the same.

sadly no:
through blockchain analysis its possible to see which coins where stolen.
would you buy them for the same price?

as soon as you put them in an exchange you account will get locked...

(thats the only reason i think coins like xmr have a chance in the future)

Have you ever made an analysis of your bitcoins or the bitcoins you have received from an exchange or any other service?

You'll probably will find a small percentage can be traced to the bicoinica hack, or some other hack and yet you're still free.

Can you show an example where what you claimed has actually happened?

i am too lazy to search right now, but i remember a case with the bitstamp hack (long time ago though).

obv if its only a small percentage there is nothing to fear, and mixers help. but that requires a fee which means the coins are a little worth less than "clean" ones.

the question you should ask yourself is: if someone offers you to sell you bitcoins from the mtgox hack/theft (directly; not mixed) would you buy them for the exact same amount? if not why not?
if bitcoin would really be fungilby you wouldnt even know where there are from.

i dont say its a big problem (because of mixers), but sadly bitcoins arent fungible on its own.

in the end it boils down to what lawyers think. if they see stolen bitcoins can be tracked (like a car): would they try to enforce to get you to pay them back or not? we dont know that yet.

[pedrog]

i am too lazy to search right now, but i remember a case with the bitstamp hack (long time ago though).

obv if its only a small percentage there is nothing to fear, and mixers help. but that requires a fee which means the coins are a little worth less than "clean" ones.

the question you should ask yourself is: if someone offers you to sell you bitcoins from the mtgox hack/theft (directly; not mixed) would you buy them for the exact same amount? if not why not?
if bitcoin would really be fungilby you wouldnt even know where there are from.

i dont say its a big problem (because of mixers), but sadly bitcoins arent fungible on its own.

in the end it boils down to what lawyers think. if they see stolen bitcoins can be tracked (like a car): would they try to enforce to get you to pay them back or not? we dont know that yet.

Do you buy stolen gold for market value?

That does not mean gold is not fungible.

What you are talking about is how to provide evidence of a crime and the ability to do so, tracking coins on the blockchain can be easy if there are few transactions between where they sit and where they were stolen.

Melting gold also adds costs to the operation, if the gold is stolen, gold still fungible.

[onemorexmr]

i am too lazy to search right now, but i remember a case with the bitstamp hack (long time ago though).

obv if its only a small percentage there is nothing to fear, and mixers help. but that requires a fee which means the coins are a little worth less than "clean" ones.

the question you should ask yourself is: if someone offers you to sell you bitcoins from the mtgox hack/theft (directly; not mixed) would you buy them for the exact same amount? if not why not?
if bitcoin would really be fungilby you wouldnt even know where there are from.

i dont say its a big problem (because of mixers), but sadly bitcoins arent fungible on its own.

in the end it boils down to what lawyers think. if they see stolen bitcoins can be tracked (like a car): would they try to enforce to get you to pay them back or not? we dont know that yet.

Do you buy stolen gold for market value?

That does not mean gold is not fungible.

What you are talking about is how to provide evidence of a crime and the ability to do so, tracking coins on the blockchain can be easy if there are few transactions between where they sit and where they were stolen.

Melting gold also adds costs to the operation, if the gold is stolen, gold still fungible.

there is no way for me to know which gold is stolen and which isnt.
thats what i call fungible.

[pedrog]

i am too lazy to search right now, but i remember a case with the bitstamp hack (long time ago though).

obv if its only a small percentage there is nothing to fear, and mixers help. but that requires a fee which means the coins are a little worth less than "clean" ones.

the question you should ask yourself is: if someone offers you to sell you bitcoins from the mtgox hack/theft (directly; not mixed) would you buy them for the exact same amount? if not why not?
if bitcoin would really be fungilby you wouldnt even know where there are from.

i dont say its a big problem (because of mixers), but sadly bitcoins arent fungible on its own.

in the end it boils down to what lawyers think. if they see stolen bitcoins can be tracked (like a car): would they try to enforce to get you to pay them back or not? we dont know that yet.

Do you buy stolen gold for market value?

That does not mean gold is not fungible.

What you are talking about is how to provide evidence of a crime and the ability to do so, tracking coins on the blockchain can be easy if there are few transactions between where they sit and where they were stolen.

Melting gold also adds costs to the operation, if the gold is stolen, gold still fungible.

there is no way for me to know which gold is stolen and which isnt.
thats what i call fungible.

There is if it has a mark on it...

[onemorexmr]

There is if it has a mark on it...

looks like this to me:

but i get your point: even money has serial numbers. but you can still use it in any store without problems.

as i said: in the end it boils down to what lawyers think and how they handle it.
but in this case i have a choice. anon coins dont have serialnumber attached to them.

[gripflierGO]

if bitcoin were to change or be replaced, i would never give up features like decentralization, Pseudonymous, and the speed of the transactions.
the only thing that i wish to see change, is the time it takes for transactions to get confirmation.

Exactly, decentralization, speed of transaction and minimum fees are the best advantages associated with bitcoins which no other currency can offer, and the best thing is now we don't have to use credit cards for making online purchases nor we are dependent on WU for transferring funds across the globe as the fees charged by WU is too high and bitcoins makes it very simple