Will you switch to a new technology, if it offers better features than Bitcoin?

[Kprawn]

We know Bitcoin was the first and is the most trusted Crypto currency out there at the moment and that it is backed by a huge network with tons of hashing power and good security, BUT would you

forget about all of that and go for a alternative technology with better features, once it is developed by all these banks? {Permissioned, private ledgers} They will obviously just copy the concept and

add some bells n whistles and then improve on scalability.

The governments will obviously make things easier for them and make it more difficult for Bitcoin, and then Bitcoin will start to lose ground and things will change in their favor. How do we stop that

or turn that against them? {The only solution I can see, is for us to educate the public and to prove to them that Bitcoin is better}

What will you do? Turn to a permissioned ledger, because things will be easier or stay with Bitcoin out of principle or because you support financial freedom? 

[Jhanzo]

We know Bitcoin was the first and is the most trusted Crypto currency out there at the moment and that it is backed by a huge network with tons of hashing power and good security, BUT would you

forget about all of that and go for a alternative technology with better features, once it is developed by all these banks? {Permissioned, private ledgers} They will obviously just copy the concept and

add some bells n whistles and then improve on scalability.

The governments will obviously make things easier for them and make it more difficult for Bitcoin, and then Bitcoin will start to lose ground and things will change in their favor. How do we stop that

what could the governments and banks create that have better features than what bitcoin already provided? no government would spend a penny to make anything that is trustless and decentralized.

[Kprawn]

We know Bitcoin was the first and is the most trusted Crypto currency out there at the moment and that it is backed by a huge network with tons of hashing power and good security, BUT would you

forget about all of that and go for a alternative technology with better features, once it is developed by all these banks? {Permissioned, private ledgers} They will obviously just copy the concept and

add some bells n whistles and then improve on scalability.

The governments will obviously make things easier for them and make it more difficult for Bitcoin, and then Bitcoin will start to lose ground and things will change in their favor. How do we stop that

what could the governments and banks create that have better features than what bitcoin already provided? no government would spend a penny to make anything that is trustless and decentralized.

Well, they will not develop something trustless, but they can make it decentralized. { Implementing nodes for example on all computers within all their bank branches } The only difference will be,

that it will be permissioned and private and they will control the development and what changes will be pushed on these clients/nodes. There are many Alt coins with some better features than

Bitcoin, but they do not have the main advantage... which in my opinion is the network affect and also the backing of a strong and secure network {hashing power provided by miners} that they do

not have to pay for. { In Bitcoin, miners give their resources and they get rewarded by the protocol } So for the users, this network is virtually free... but banks will have to pay for that resources. 

[Klestin]

Bitcoin is an open sourced, consensus-based distributed system.  If objectively superior features are developed elsewhere, they may be integrated into Bitcoin. In fact, many already have been.

[Kprawn]

Bitcoin is an open sourced, consensus-based distributed system.  If objectively superior features are developed elsewhere, they may be integrated into Bitcoin. In fact, many already have been.

This is where the problem is... consensus takes time in Bitcoin, and a lot of people with personal agendas are influencing the ultimate consensus. These private technologies will have a centralized

organization and they will adapt quickly to the needs of the centralized organization and developers will have little say in the matter. They will just be employed to make the changes forced down

on them by these organizations. Bitcoin can adopt many of these improved features, BUT the slow consensus system will hamper their progress in the future. The debate about the block size have

been going on for years... How much longer will a major change or a added feature take, to reach consensus?

[LordCoder]

Well, you can create an altcoin so you can add your own features to Bitcoin, but don't expect it to be better than Bitcoin.

[Jhanzo]

Well, they will not develop something trustless, but they can make it decentralized. { Implementing nodes for example on all computers within all their bank branches } The only difference will be,

that it will be permissioned and private and they will control the development and what changes will be pushed on these clients/nodes. There are many Alt coins with some better features than

Bitcoin, but they do not have the main advantage... which in my opinion is the network affect and also the backing of a strong and secure network {hashing power provided by miners} that they do

not have to pay for. { In Bitcoin, miners give their resources and they get rewarded by the protocol } So for the users, this network is virtually free... but banks will have to pay for that resources.  

I think you're misunderstanding what a full decentralization is. what you described are still centralized because it have a central authority (the banks). they can still change anything without consensus.

[Lauda]

BUT would you forget about all of that and go for a alternative technology with better features, once it is developed by all these banks? {Permissioned, private ledgers} They will obviously just copy the concept and

I don't even understand how this is a question. Wasn't the initial goal to take away the power of the banks? Why are you even here?

I think you're misunderstanding what a full decentralization is.

Correct. Bitcoin's strength lies in its decentralization.

If objectively superior features are developed elsewhere, they may be integrated into Bitcoin. In fact, many already have been.

Exactly, as long as these features are open-source as well.

Well, they will not develop something trustless, but they can make it decentralized.

That's not decentralized.

[Amph]

at this point every thing that will be created with slighlty better features than bitcoin and based on a decentralized system(because otherwise it would rubbish and i would not even consider it) it would be a clone of bitcoin

i can not even imagine something that truly offer something revolutionary as bitcoin for the money payment system

[tyz]

You actually do not need to fully switch to different technology. Bitcoin can be extended by features that "technology 2.0" coins offer by using Factom or Counterparty for instance.

[fravia]

at this point every thing that will be created with slighlty better features than bitcoin and based on a decentralized system(because otherwise it would rubbish and i would not even consider it) it would be a clone of bitcoin

i can not even imagine something that truly offer something revolutionary as bitcoin for the money payment system

uhmm and how about that currency called ethereum that everyone says is better than bitcoin at a lot of points and might have a way better future than bitcoin might possibly have?

i think i wouldnt move from bitcoin anywhere else as people wouldnt be that interested in any new currencies than bitcoin, i hope that there will never be any other popular currencies than bitcoin

[Lauda]

uhmm and how about that currency called ethereum that everyone says is better than bitcoin at a lot of points and might have a way better future than bitcoin might possibly have?

Only the people who have money in it 'say it is better', the others laugh at them. ETH is something different, a platform for applications.

i think i wouldnt move from bitcoin anywhere else as people wouldnt be that interested in any new currencies than bitcoin

They already are, that's why we have altcoins.

Bitcoin can be extended by features that "technology 2.0" coins offer by using Factom or Counterparty for instance.

Why would one want to use either?

[shorena]

Well, they will not develop something trustless, but they can make it decentralized. { Implementing nodes for example on all computers within all their bank branches } The only difference will be,

that it will be permissioned and private and they will control the development and what changes will be pushed on these clients/nodes. There are many Alt coins with some better features than

Bitcoin, but they do not have the main advantage... which in my opinion is the network affect and also the backing of a strong and secure network {hashing power provided by miners} that they do

not have to pay for. { In Bitcoin, miners give their resources and they get rewarded by the protocol } So for the users, this network is virtually free... but banks will have to pay for that resources.  

I think you're misunderstanding what a full decentralization is. what you described are still centralized because it have a central authority (the banks). they can still change anything without consensus.

Which is exactly what would make this alternative problematic. One of the key features bitcoin offers is that it is difficult to change. If a couple of people could change what is understood as bitcoin, it would have failed. What would you say if these few people decided that the halving does not happen and we will have a 25 BTC block reward forever (or until they changed their mood)? Would you think also those that see bitcoin as a long term investment would still hodl their coins? I dont think so.

[spazzdla]

I would use it, I wouldn't switch.

IMO BTC will become the new gold.

[bigs21024]

that would be touchy it would have to be around and prove itself for a while there is so many scams out there no days.

[traderbit]

I doubt that a new technology will be better than bitcoin, even if it happens i don't think to leave bitcoin, many people accept the bitcoin as the payment and since i can trade through bitcoin then i will not leave it.

[ATguy]

Better features often have drawbacks as well, and if there are not any drawbacks, Bitcoin can implement such feature sonner or later. For example trully anonymous altcoins drawback is their transactions are bigger in size, thus much harder to scale such anonymous altcoins to more people.

[hv_]

Average Joe will chose by price. I suppose he will not see the banking blockchain at all since this will be fully covered by a new shiny Visa app.

The issue comes if Joe sees that the buying power of his $ gets worse and worse that is the point when he might buy BTC.

[BitHodler]

I will stay on Bitcoin's side as long as it is the top digital currency.

If I see the majority of the community supports some thing other than Bitcoin because it's getting surpassed, then I will most likely follow them.

[Bestwishes745]

these struggles are going on by a number of oter crypto-currency but they are unable to compete bitcoin and people are more attracted to bitcoin rather than any other technology.