Will direct peer-to-peer Bitcoin transactions be possible in future?

[Oliver A]

Will direct peer-to-peer Bitcoin transactions (bypassing an exchange) be possible in future?

[Anti-Cen]

I think you mean p2p without miners but if this was allowed then how would the developers
make any money but i must admit that i like the plan but let me just calculate the transaction
costs

$0.00000000000000000001 = ISP cost of sending data

We just need some type of autonomous currency unit to make this work and then
I can save $30 in fees when sending you $1

[TutorShow]

Will direct peer-to-peer Bitcoin transactions (bypassing an exchange) be possible in future?

bitcoin is peer to peer transactions  without needed to exchange.
many people know more about bitcoin and it is possible to make normal deals using bitcoin only.
we need longer time to see many accept it.

[bit-freedom]

Do you mean direct BTC transfer between users in an exchange with fees? Yes, it is free to transfer Bitcoin in coinbase between coinbase users. You just have to know the email address of the person to send BTC to.

[BrewMaster]

bitcoin transactions have always been peer to peer and without any exchange or any middle man in the process.

even now exchanges are not required to make a bitcoin transaction. they are not even needed when you want to buy and sell bitcoin. it is just more convenient to use them sometimes to do the trades faster and easier.

[Davidbee]

Yes, right now, you just need to know the address of the other person's wallet, and you can transfer the money, but these transactions are dangerous, there is no guarantee of security, you have to be careful about fraud.

[RodeoX]

In the beginning that was the only option. Direct peer-to-peer transactions are what bitcoin is all about. You never need a bank, an exchange, or any third party. They only exist because sometimes it makes more sense. For example exchanges facilitate easy transactions by connecting buyers and sellers, banks have vaults for holding you private keys. But no one is needed.

[bitfools]

Yes, right now, you just need to know the address of the other person's wallet, and you can transfer the money, but these transactions are dangerous, there is no guarantee of security, you have to be careful about fraud.

BINGO can't use the same address twice, so u go to a public outhouse in india to take a shit, but when you enter and when you leave the target payment address has changed 10x because hackers have stolen the 1 cent you paid for the shit, so you have to stay in the outhouse until you can prove you paid, but by then the confirmation time is months, not days

I think that anybody that advocates BTC should be a mass payment system is an idiot, and could possible be a harm to society and to him self.

So you can't use the same address twice, for either payment or reciept, cuz as you know if you use the same payment twice, then I get your R/S values from the TX script and can hack your private-key from your public-key and R/S values from your sig on the ecdsa, by 2020 the BTC-CORE will have gone to SECP256R1 as proposed all along by certicom, but by that time I will have broken SECP256R1

( currently btc uses secp256k1 which is used by nobody on earth, and is considered to be a joke in the cryptography community, so go figure the idiots call BTC the greatest invention since toilet-paper and experts call it a fools errand, ... which is it? Well who cares because the longer they use weak stupid software as the backbone of BTC the longer I can continue my hobby of hacking btc. )

The laughable deal here is that HODL is not an investment plan, its a survival of BTC plan, because if there was a mass exit the ponzi would have collapsed years ago

[Caesar-Giulius]

OP. Bitcoin has been used as a peer to peer payment since it started.

Yes, right now, you just need to know the address of the other person's wallet, and you can transfer the money, but these transactions are dangerous, there is no guarantee of security, you have to be careful about fraud.

BINGO can't use the same address twice, so u go to a public outhouse in india to take a shit, but when you enter and when you leave the target payment address has changed 10x because hackers have stolen the 1 cent you paid for the shit, so you have to stay in the outhouse until you can prove you paid, but by then the confirmation time is months, not days

I think that anybody that advocates BTC should be a mass payment system is an idiot, and could possible be a harm to society and to him self.

So you can't use the same address twice, for either payment or reciept, cuz as you know if you use the same payment twice, then I get your R/S values from the TX script and can hack your private-key from your public-key and R/S values from your sig on the ecdsa, by 2020 the BTC-CORE will have gone to SECP256R1 as proposed all along by certicom, but by that time I will have broken SECP256R1

The laughable deal here is that HODL is not an investment plan, its a survival of BTC plan, because if there was a mass exit the ponzi would have collapsed years ago

What an interesting example. 

[bitfools]

In the beginning that was the only option. Direct peer-to-peer transactions are what bitcoin is all about. You never need a bank, an exchange, or any third party. They only exist because sometimes it makes more sense. For example exchanges facilitate easy transactions by connecting buyers and sellers, banks have vaults for holding you private keys. But no one is needed.

The original tx's also included your IP address, so much for anonymity

But I am a believe in the original anarchy of satoshi, and the libertarian bent of BTC, that said, I think NakamotaSAtoshi was a NSA caricature and that they never meant to give us anarchy or liberatarian power, but certainly the dream should live on

So NOW the MINERS no longer control BTC, now the mining-pool managers have all the power FACT

So now instead of instead of .lt. 50% consensus you have china asics running 90% or more of BTc mining, .. tell us more about dreams of our fathers, for I need sweet dreams for my nap

In the beginning a transaction was to be free not $50

The funny thing is that todays BITCOIN is like a bastard drunken child jeebus that wandered the desert 30 years and has returned and all these 'legacy parents' dont' see any change in their baby-jeebus

IMHO

1.) kill all the mining pools

2.) kill all the coinbase assholes (IRS-NSA-CIA ) that control exchanges, KYC and know his shoe size and condom preferences, ...

3.) kill the day trading of BTC where now today its no more than a casino for morons to play lotto

4.) make BTC anonymous with real secure private addresses, not tied to any public

5.) figure out how to stop rogue full-nodes that do nothing more than collect IP's for the GOV tax man

In summary, its not your grandmothers BTC anymore

[amacar2]

Will direct peer-to-peer Bitcoin transactions (bypassing an exchange) be possible in future?

What are you asking? it is already possible actually it is possible from the day 1.

If you are talking about buying/selling of your bitcoin without any third party being envolved than yes sooner or later we will have working decentralized trading platform where we can trade our coins without trusting any exchanges or going through heavy verification procedure they have.

[Anti-Cen]

bitcoin transactions have always been peer to peer and without any exchange or any middle man in the process.

So P2P means that I use a service to get your IP-Address (Full nodes service)
and then my wallet must speak directly to yours if we have "no middle man in the process "
so this $30 i keep losing from my wallet during the point-to-point transactions must
be hackers steeling my money right 

Bit-Torrent is P2P, Bitcoin is not by any means

[Anti-Cen]

If you are talking about buying/selling of your bitcoin without any third party being envolved than yes sooner or later we will have working decentralized trading platform where we can trade our coins without trusting any exchanges or going through heavy verification procedure they have.

Now I like this plan so will it come before or after the LN is released in 6-9 months time and
how will the BTC development team get a bung back from such a fantastic plan that should had
been included from day one.

Very hypercritical this is but it will never happen if you ask me   

[nioctiB#1]

Will direct peer-to-peer Bitcoin transactions (bypassing an exchange) be possible in future?

Did you read the whitepaper of bitcoin? because i think you didnt or your just some kind of a troll. at the very first page of bitcoin whitepaper it says that bitcoin is a peer to peer electronic cash system so it means that from the very start bitcoin transactions are peer to peer. when you deposit bitcoin to exchanges, send bitcoin to other wallet that is all peer to peer transactions.

[bitart]

Will direct peer-to-peer Bitcoin transactions (bypassing an exchange) be possible in future?

Maybe you mean will direct peer-to-peer Bitcoin to altcoins transactions be possible in the future?
This makes sense in case you think about decentralized exchanges, there are a few and you can trade your bitcoins for altcoins (and vice versa) there. Also, decentralized exchanges are present for ETH and for the tokens as well.
Maybe in the future the decentralized exchanges will spread but you should not forget about the lightning network and about the atomic swap too, so there are a lot of developments in progress to help bitcoin transactions in the future.

[hosseinimr93]

We are already able to use bitcoin for peer to peer transactions. There is no need to use exchanges. If you use exchanges, it is not peer to peer as the exchange is the middle man.
But you can use some wallets which allow you to send bitcoin without any middle man.

[gentlemand]

It would be very interesting to know what proportion of transactions really are truly peer to peer - ie one full wallet running a full node going to another. It's probably pitifully low at this point in time.

[1Referee]

It would be very interesting to know what proportion of transactions really are truly peer to peer - ie one full wallet running a full node going to another. It's probably pitifully low at this point in time.

Of course it is low. People aren't willing to install a client that downloads like 160 gigs of data, and each time it starts up on traditional hdd's it takes time to load, and especially when you're switching wallet files. In my case, loading a different wallet file in the wallet directory means that the client will check blocks for nearly two hours straight. I run a full node because I want to contribute, but that's not somthing most of the recent people joining here are thinking about. They just want a light client connected to a server node, and that's really it, and honestly, I can't really blame them. The larger the blockchain grows, the lower the number of people are that do the same as what I have been doing for more than two years now.