If you could change bitcoin what would you change?

[TimeBits]

Let`s say you are satoshi and you can get the miners on board or the majority of them, what would you change about bitcoin?

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

I would add a feature where each address becomes 1 vote on the network. (true decentralization)
I would delete 51% attacks because of this ^ it would just become a decision by the majority of users on the network.

I would add something like this, where our votes actually matter now, https://imgur.com/haz02ll because we vote on issues rather voting people to vote for us, now we all have a say of where our taxes go. I am sure military spending will be cut in half fast. Instead we would create weapons of mass creation rather than destruction. Farms and back up housing for all rather than trump spending 107 million on golf, there would be no homeless in Cali.

I would like to see the network fee`s go to fund a bitcoin society rather than just supporting miners.

I would make bitcoin an amplifier to bitcointime so both have a purpose.
bitcoin becomes like a saving account interest amplifier, bitcointime is your spending account

I would destroy fiat for good, because it is $lavery and a $cam, It will be the end of our species if we continue down this path.

[javadsalehi]

Let`s say you are satoshi and you can get the miners on board or the majority of them, what would you change about bitcoin?

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

This is in contract with anonymity which is main advantage of bitcoin.
Possibility of having several addresses is one of main features of bitcoin. This is due to people's privacy. People should be able to create a new address whenever they want.

[TimeBits]

Let`s say you are satoshi and you can get the miners on board or the majority of them, what would you change about bitcoin?

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

This is in contract with anonymity which is main advantage of bitcoin.
Possibility of having several addresses is one of main features of bitcoin. This is due to people's privacy. People should be able to create a new address whenever they want.

Never said you can`t have multiple addresses after receiving funds you can even use a mixer if you want.

If you can`t see where this leads https://www.bloomberg.com/features/richest-families-in-the-world/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

I suggest watching the end game of bitcoin, in the huntercoin simulation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7TLFyK_3Pk

1 miner wins, the rest of the people die. It is the true, the rich get richer, all of the small miners will get pushed out and their will be one miner who wins. I am a farmer, my farm cannot compete with the bigger farmers anymore, they can afford baskets, sprays and petrol cheaper in bulk.

The same will happen to bitcoin mining with electricity and buying asics in bulk cheaper.


Keep in mind, what do you have to give up to obtain a bank account? all of your ID to a private company, not a blockchain system that is decentralized.

Anyways, you can turn a blind eye to this, but in 2142 you leave our kind a shit future.

[Oyarebu]

Candidly speaking, the only thing to be change if given the opportunity to change Bitcoin is; whales never to be in control or be able to manipulate the market, also, not even news to slightly or directly have effect on Bitcoin price. These are my thought of the possibility of a change. More also, i will change any means of a fork from Bitcoin Blockchain.

[BrewMaster]

Let`s say you are satoshi  what would you change about bitcoin?

Satoshi doesn't own bitcoin! that would mean centralization. and you don't need to be Satosho to be able to change anything.

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

it sounds like two terrible ideas that were smashed together. it lacks privacy as you seem to be needing to reveal your identity and also it encourages laziness of "producing money out of thin air" by doing nothing. not to mention it also encourages address reuse.

[TimeBits]

Let`s say you are satoshi  what would you change about bitcoin?

Satoshi doesn't own bitcoin! that would mean centralization. and you don't need to be Satosho to be able to change anything.

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

it sounds like two terrible ideas that were smashed together. it lacks privacy as you seem to be needing to reveal your identity and also it encourages laziness of "producing money out of thin air" by doing nothing. not to mention it also encourages address reuse.

How does any money come into existence? USD, CAD, EURO, YEN?

Printing out of thin air, by private family`s, does it still have value? apparently.

You know more people would be working if they knew they were earning a supply that is fair, go out and ask the homeless why they don`t get a job, they say because fiat is a $cam, these people are not fucking morons.
So it would actually have the reverse effect. I know I would be working tomorrow again if I was earning a supply that we all created at a fair rate, not just a few printing it at a unlimited rate, I am not a fucking retard $lave.  I refuse to earn any more CAD or pay any taxes in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRweWnbB86w Weekly Update --- Endgame for the Fed?

It has more privacy that then current banking system, and you are no longer a $lave.

The difference is, it is backed by duration, not by "thin air", like the current $lave fiat.

Are you really this fucking dumb? for the 3rd time, stop drinking, it makes you fucking stupid. I can tell because you still have not come to your common senses that everyone should be making the supply not a select few.

and we should be trying to eliminate jobs not create them, but if you want to incentive for people to work, perhaps if they were not working for a $cam $lavery supply created by a few out of fucking thin air in unlimited amounts, and there was a supply created equally by everyone, there would be more incentive and a point to trying to get ahead.

[TimeBits]

You also want the incentive to be because the person wants to do it not because of monetary gain. People don`t choose to be a doctor because they like to help people, they do it because it pays the most. MOST OF THEM

exhibit a: People getting beat because there incentive is money, not because they are passionate about their job

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXwQ2fxsnuo Secret camera film nurses abusing 89-year-old Arab man - Daily Mail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptR5-j7roVg Assault of Elderly Dementia Patient by Nursing Home Employee Caught on Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1pjPb8jQHw  CCTV shows Indonesian caregiver abusing elderly man

exhibit b: People getting ripped off because there incentive is money, not because they are passionate about their job

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efDcqlk2140  Watch Repairman Get Caught Trying to Charge $700 for Simple Air Vent Fix
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-avpx8UTakI  Oil change scams: Hidden camera investigation on what really happens to your car (CBC Marketplace)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ytmN7T_HEI 20/20 Undercover Investigation on Repair Shop Fraud and Dishonesty

You will thank me, when your old and in your nursing home not getting punched in the face by the person that is suppose to be feeding you or getting ripped off by your dentist, mechanics and people cutting corners in the food supply (farming) feeding people literately cancer to make a little more money because it is cheaper to use the unsafe chemicals rather than natural farming and taking a bit of a loss to feed people real fresh fruit that will keep them alive rather than kill them.

I know I did the lines for Warner farms, over 20 farms I put the irrigation to from lake Ontario with no filter, I feel horrible about it, I did not know at the time how many people I was killing until I thought about it years later. They still use that water btw and the farms here still use round up on all of their shit. Hopefully all the people I fed on my farm makes up for it, that did not get cancer water in their fruits and cancer sprays. I hope I fixed my kill to death ratio. I had to work on warner farms, because my farm went out of businesses because the rich get richer and the poor get pushed out the fucking game.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/10/health/monsanto-johnson-trial-verdict/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/13/health/monsanto-roundup-cancer-verdict-bn/index.html

stay the fuck away from soy and beer, it`s called "roundup" for a reason.

[seoincorporation]

if i could change something i would give to bitcoin 1 minute blocks and 8Mb blocks, that way the network would be much faster and could become a competence to VISA and Mastercard.

Another thing i would change would be the data structure to make it ore lime Monero, this way bitcoin would be untraceable.

[kryptqnick]

Let`s say you are satoshi and you can get the miners on board or the majority of them, what would you change about bitcoin?

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

This is in contract with anonymity which is main advantage of bitcoin.
Possibility of having several addresses is one of main features of bitcoin. This is due to people's privacy. People should be able to create a new address whenever they want.

Never said you can`t have multiple addresses after receiving funds you can even use a mixer if you want.

But is not it literally what you said (I made the relevant text from your quote above bold)? I am confused now... Can we or can we not have multiple addresses in your approach? And if we can, then how to prevent manipulations with the voting system? You said the following:

I would add a feature where each address becomes 1 vote on the network

If there's one vote per address, but one person can have multiple addresses, it means that the system can be abused with some people having more weight than others when it comes to the decision-making process. Could you clarify what you meant, and how this thing with addresses is supposed to work?

[TimeBits]

Let`s say you are satoshi and you can get the miners on board or the majority of them, what would you change about bitcoin?

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

This is in contract with anonymity which is main advantage of bitcoin.
Possibility of having several addresses is one of main features of bitcoin. This is due to people's privacy. People should be able to create a new address whenever they want.

Never said you can`t have multiple addresses after receiving funds you can even use a mixer if you want.

But is not it literally what you said (I made the relevant text from your quote above bold)? I am confused now... Can we or can we not have multiple addresses in your approach? And if we can, then how to prevent manipulations with the voting system? You said the following:

I would add a feature where each address becomes 1 vote on the network

If there's one vote per address, but one person can have multiple addresses, it means that the system can be abused with some people having more weight than others when it comes to the decision-making process. Could you clarify what you meant, and how this thing with addresses is supposed to work?

1 address that is generation our coins and vote, now you can send you bitcointime or bitcoin to a address not verified by youself to spend
So you can have 1000000`s of addresses but only 1 of them will be attached to yourself as the KYC to the system. So you can`t upload yourself as the key to multiple addresses to get multiple votes or gain UBI x100 because the system will know your key (yourself) is in use.

You understand? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustered_file_system#Distributed_file_systems
So i get my bitcointime to my address, I create 1000`s of addresses to spend it where I want if I want anonymity, I can use mixers to, it is irrelevant at the point as we know at the time of supply creation the coins are made by a legit source.

You can encrypt the address that are voting as well, but it won`t matter as only the system knows not any person, true decentralization.

[veleten]

its price , definitely - it should cost at least 100.000$
on  a serious note , one address defeats the purpose of bitcoin , it would fully de-anonymize it
having miner's fee is one of the essential features that allows to keep the blockchain alive , after all of the coins are mined this is what will keep the system going
take away the miner's fee and none would ever have any incentive to mine after the last coin will have been mined
also destroying fiat fiat for good is both impossible and bad , without paper money we would be locked in an electronic concentration camp
in general bitcoin achieved what it has achieved because what it  is , its bottlenecks are well known and developers are trying to address the issues , LN as one of the examples
changing one or more of the key features could result in unforeseen consequences

[dul48]

It's a good question. I'd made the possible minable quantity of btc less. Just to increase btc's value.

[timerland]

Well, let's assume we'd be able to manipulate and change a decentralized currency (which would be close to impossible), and where free to do as we wish.

I personally wouldn't change much. Bitcoin is perfect at it's current state, and the only issues I currently see are that governments are very unwilling to adopt the coin due to it's decentralization aspects.

Maybe there would be a way that you could make bitcoin more attractive for government adoption, but also not change the decentralization aspects? It'll be pretty hard to do, but that's the only real change needed. Everything else is really too wild or too far from the original Bitcoin idea to be viable.

[Artemis3]

Let`s say you are satoshi and you can get the miners on board or the majority of them, what would you change about bitcoin?

I would add a feature called bitcointime, where unique addresses/sidechains that are verified by the system (so we can only each have 1 address) create bitcointime over duration at a fixed rate (universal basic income). The people themselves would willingly upload themselves as the key to unlock that address using filesharing on a blockchain, the system can backtrack to make sure no duplicate information can be used because everything is stored on a blockchain.

I would add a feature where each address becomes 1 vote on the network. (true decentralization)
I would delete 51% attacks because of this ^ it would just become a decision by the majority of users on the network.

I would add something like this, where our votes actually matter now, because we vote on issues rather voting people to vote for us, now we all have a say of where our taxes go. I am sure military spending will be cut in half fast. Instead we would create weapons of mass creation rather than destruction. Farms and back up housing for all rather than trump spending 107 million on golf, there would be no homeless in Cali.

I would like to see the network fee`s go to fund a bitcoin society rather than just supporting miners.

I would make bitcoin an amplifier to bitcointime so both have a purpose.
bitcoin becomes like a saving account interest amplifier, bitcointime is your spending account

I would destroy fiat for good, because it is $lavery and a $cam, It will be the end of our species if we continue down this path.

Unique addresses is the same as IDs, and goes against anonymity.
One of your ideas about votes to undo attacks already exists in some other altcoin.
You cannot destroy fiat with good intentions or pretty words, show us the code, make your own altcoin.
I don't believe in basic universal income, and if you give houses to the homeless they would sell them, spend the money and go back to the streets.

You can develop secure voting systems using blockchain, it doesn't have to be tied to a coin. But that alone isn't changing anything unless you are planning a revolutionary change of government going for direct democracy or such.

[Hueristic]

Fungability.

[Saltius]

Destroy those p2pk coins when needed.

[TimeBits]

Destroy those p2pk coins when needed.

what do you mean? just send it to a address that will never be made, or send it here 1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa

What I been doing is using all my fiat to buy bitcoin than I slam my face on the keyboard a bit and send it to random addresses, I burn two types of money at once. I used to use the fiat as toilet paper but here in Canada they made it plastic scummy money so I can`t even burn for fire starter or use it as toilet paper anymore, because I realize money is what is wrong with our species, we are the only ones that use it, I think we are not the smartest beings on this planet. Peaplants and cabbage are much smarter than humans, same with cats. We don`t need money as a medium of exchange, we don`t even need to exchange shit, greed will kill all of us, and not just us, other species on this planet and already has. I am sorry creator my kind is so fucking stupid, I really am.

[Herbert2020]

changing bitcoin will never end well for anybody, you can see how many copycat altcoins there are that have failed because they copied bitcoin and tried to change that. on the contrary you can see the small number of coins that were original with an innovative design that were more successful than the rest of the altcoins.
so, if i had the opportunity to change anything, i would start from scratch and implement my idea as an original project building it from the ground up instead of trying to change bitcoin which has a good design that works well and doesn't need changing.

[jostorres]

I will change how bitcoin system and upgrade for many country allowed using bitcoin as transaction and legal payment, its the best way how to make bitcoin become higher price.

If he is really to upgrade it and make it accepted by many countries, then he should be ready to remove the anonymity in it because if you ask me what the major issue of government is with bitcoin, it is that anonymity, and anytime they hear bitcoin, they feel it is a system that has been created to make government loose what they have been enjoying for years through taxes.

The only way for them to uniformly accept it is without anonymity, and then, that would have defeated the objective of bitcoin, because the main reason why bitcoin was crated was for its privacy, and I think that bitcoin would not much be different from every other digital payment methods that we have out there if he succumbs to that government desire, which may even make it loose it’s of users.

[shoreno]

What is there to change.

you should ask your self first before you ask that question on here  .  cant you see btc has so many drawbacks  .

Other features are in altcoins.

true but it would be much better if we can stock all that features on a single coin  ?  in that way btc will only be the one that gets demand  . people will never be scammed again and people can now earn big at all times .

You can't really make a perfect system for currency. They thought that fiat is, but look at where we are now. Btc if fine as it

i also think that is fiat because fiat is pretty legal and no fluctuations  . it can work offline and many more advantage compare to btc  . look what we are now , people still complain about the issues of btc  but at the sametime they continue using it