My issues with Bitcoin, and its progress so far

[Ucy]

Before I start highlighting the issues with Bitcoin and its progress and development so far, let's first of all understand why it was created in the beginning to be able to determine whether or not it's progressing at the right direction or at a pace it ought to be progressing.

In the past during the Bush/Obama era, there was a global financial crisis that necessitated the creation of a different financial system that is based on predetermined rules or protocols hardcoded into the it and difficult to change especially without community consent. This is to make it difficult for unilateral/unchecked decisions or changes to be made by few individuals that affect everyone who is part of the financial system.  For this to be possible the whole system has to be monitored and controlled by the community or participants, so that the unilateral changes become almost impossible. This would mean running the system in decentralized, transparent and trustless manner continously, otherwise it eventually becomes centralized for the unilateral changes by few corrupt individuals to be possible, which could possibly ruin the system and lead to financial crisis. This is what Bitcoin is about, to give control back to the community.

Unfortunately, if not done right, a thing like Bitcoin, controlled and supervised by the community can be slow in progress or development compared to few people taking decisions without supervision. Much of the good ideas proposed to help develop Bitcoin without violating the important principles that enable it to be supervised and controlled by the community have not been implemented. This has kept Bitcoin poorly developed and slow in progress causing it to become somewhat outdated, slow, clunky, difficult to use, etc. By now, it should be possible to use Bitcoin in decentralized peer-to-peer manner with very cheap fees and really fast transaction on a very advanced system that can handle alot of things imaginable, but so far  very little to nothing has been achieved. Whatever advanced solution or progress that currently exist, actually deviate from the original goal of Bitcoin and could lead to crisis.

Poor, deceptive and centralized alternatives have emerged, with solutions that seem to solve the Bitcoin issues, but underneath the whole thing is nothing but scams administered by greedy overlords who lack principles and have little to zero idea (or don't really care) why Bitcoin was invented in the first place

[Jawhead999]

That's why before it's too late, at least "we" should be the one who use Bitcoin to not linked to centralized exchanges or centralized entity by using non custodial wallet and trade Bitcoin via peer to peer.

But, at some point in the future I think almost all Bitcoin will belong to centralized exchanges, institutions, government or country.

Profit beats everything, people might shift to Monero.

[d5000]

Unfortunately, if not done right, a thing like Bitcoin, controlled and supervised by the community can be slow in progress or development compared to few people taking decisions without supervision. Much of the good ideas proposed to help develop Bitcoin without violating the important principles that enable it to be supervised and controlled by the community have not been implemented. This has kept Bitcoin poorly developed and slow in progress causing it to become somewhat outdated, slow, clunky, difficult to use, etc.

Do you compare Bitcoin to certain altcoins here, which market themselves to be "faster", "easier to use", etc.? These altcoins register different tradeoffs. A "high throughput coin" like Solana for example isn't superior technologically to Bitcoin. They can't escape the blocksize/decentralization dilemma, so SOL for example has enormous requirements for full nodes (128 GB minimum RAM, for example, while Bitcoin can run on 8 GB).

Bitcoin deliberately choses to preserve decentralization, because decentralization is the main advantage of blockchains. For a highly centralized system like Solana, you don't need a blockchain really.

And Bitcoin is not "poorly developed" at all. There are many real innovations taking place. The BIP process is quite straightforward, and good ideas without risk to harm decentralization, like Taproot, get implemented.

In some phases some altcoins indeed can look like they developed "faster", but often once they reach a certain milestone, they tend to stay in a quite static state of development.

Whatever advanced solution or progress that currently exist, actually deviate from the original goal of Bitcoin and could lead to crisis.

I think you refer to solutions like Lightning here. Why do you think it "deviates" from the "original goal" and "leads to crisis"?

If not, then please clarify

Poor, deceptive and centralized alternatives have emerged, with solutions that seem to solve the Bitcoin issues, but underneath the whole thing is nothing but scams administered by greedy overlords who lack principles and have little to zero idea (or don't really care) why Bitcoin was invented in the first place

Here I partly agree, centralized L2's are among these solutions. But there is also progress in this area. Projects like BitVM and even some L2s like Nomic and tBTC (Threshold Network) actually do solve problems and push Bitcoin forward.

[hd49728]

This would mean running the system in decentralized, transparent and trustless manner continously

In Bitcoin, you don't trust anyone, everything need to be confirmed like transactions and blocks must be verify by Bitcoin full nodes which will relay verified blocks to other peer nodes.

Verify is key, don't trust, so Bitcoin blockchain is not a trustless blockchain.

Unfortunately, if not done right, a thing like Bitcoin, controlled and supervised by the community can be slow in progress or development compared to few people taking decisions without supervision.

If you have a good one, you don't need to hurry, to be quick with development and upgrade. You can see altcoins are very quick with their launches and developments, because they must quickly scam people to get money from their victims. Bitcoin is helpful and it does not look for victims like altcoins.

Bitcoin explained for Discover how Bitcoin works and why it’s so popular. It is simple but explains about Bitcoin better than your topic.

Bitcoin information and resources and Learn me a Bitcoin are very helpful for learning about Bitcoin too.

[Finestream]

That's why before it's too late, at least "we" should be the one who use Bitcoin to not linked to centralized exchanges or centralized entity by using non custodial wallet and trade Bitcoin via peer to peer.

But, at some point in the future I think almost all Bitcoin will belong to centralized exchanges, institutions, government or country.

Profit beats everything, people might shift to Monero.

It’s never a problem for us bitcoiners since we all know how to promote bitcoin and use it at its highest advantage. The problem is, majority of the people are still uneducated and unaware about the true potentials of bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not actually the government’s enemy, but it could be the only key instead to promote financial sovereignty of the country’s economy. I think the best preparation for this is through educating and raising awareness thru public education campaigns that will highlight on financial inclusion. When people finally understand about bitcoin, then it’s easier for them to adapt and adjust, and take progress with bitcoin.

[Ambatman]

Bitcoin is first decentralized before other things. In life there are usually trade offs
Scalabilty was traded for security.
Bitcoin development isn't slow, it shouldn't be compared to that of altcoins
You can see that from Bitcoins BIPs https://github.com/bitcoin/bips .

I doubt you talking about L2 because they didn't touch on Bitcoin main protocol but built a house upon a foundation, Bitcoin.


Scalabilty to me ain't really an issue especially for macro transactions because it's easier to solve for scalabilty than it would had been security
Without losing 'Bitcoin'.

[Alpha Marine]

I don't think Bitcoin is "slow in progress." If that's the case, then many people who are already familiar with it will abandon it, but as we can see, the reverse is true. More people are embracing Bitcoin.
Bitcoin has one major problem: high network fees. If other payment systems are cheaper and faster than Bitcoin, that would be a big problem. This issue can be fixed, although it has refused to be fixed. 
Aside from that, I don't see how bitcoin is becoming obsolete compared to other coins. Currently, bitcoin has a 60% market dominance, a "slow in progress or development" coin won't do that considering there are thousands of other coins out there.
Bitcoin has its issues, but slow in progress and development isn't one of them in my opinion.

[Dunamisx]

Poor, deceptive and centralized alternatives have emerged, with solutions that seem to solve the Bitcoin issues, but underneath the whole thing is nothing but scams administered by greedy overlords who lack principles and have little to zero idea (or don't really care) why Bitcoin was invented in the first place

There is nothing hard in knowing more about bitcoin and its importance, but the issues lies also with its users who have little idea on what bitcoin is, how could they be able to withstand on any falsified information given unto them about bitcoin, how could they understand the reason why they shouldn't have their asset under a centralized authority, many are willing to go for bitcoin but only few are having the right information and orientation on the right and necessary things to do before hand.

[PrivacyG]

Bitcoin was started as sort of an experiment.  It was never believed at first that it will become what it is.  This does not mean it is drifting away from achieving its purpose, it only has a few burdens that need to be taken care of before it progresses further.

There are many unforeseen problems that appeared after the release of Bitcoin.  Somebody from 2010 would not comprehend a Bitcoin usage of this size.  And while theoretically it should and can do every thing it promises, there are variations that definitely made things harder.

Altcoins do not solve any thing.  Some of them may solve a few things, but unless they are used as much as Bitcoin is, the theory is practically useless.  We have seen other Blockchains struggling with high usage before.  Promises are not always met with reality.  There are ways to avoid all the troubles Bitcoin is currently experiencing too.  So there is that.

Progress may have been slowed down a little bit.  It could always catch up however.  I mean.  On the other hand, you have all those other development areas that are making it progress quicker too.  Such as Bisq.  Or Atomic Swaps.  Or Silent Payments.  There are so many things going on that it is really hard to know whether it is really a slowed down progress or not.  It probably depends on the subjective perspective of what progress truly is.

[Darker45]

Bitcoin wasn't created simply because there was a financial crisis during the Bush/Obama era. Bitcoin was 40 years in the making. There were precursors to Bitcoin. There had been numerous attempts to develop digital cash, to try to separate money from state, and so on. Bitcoin was the most successful. So, it wasn't the 2007-2008 financial crisis that necessitated the creation Bitcoin. Perhaps it's the fiat system, the kind of money built upon debt, that necessitated it.

Bitcoin isn't perfect and perhaps a perfect currency isn't at all possible. There will always be trade-offs.

[HopeGen]

....
Unfortunately, if not done right, a thing like Bitcoin, controlled and supervised by the community can be slow in progress or development compared to few people taking decisions without supervision. Much of the good ideas proposed to help develop Bitcoin without violating the important principles that enable it to be supervised and controlled by the community have not been implemented. This has kept Bitcoin poorly developed and slow in progress....

This has been a huge year for progress with Layer 2 projects which improve Bitcoin dramatically, and (before people start attacking) not all L2 projects have their own token, some important ones are pure BTC.

[davis196]

Much of the good ideas proposed to help develop Bitcoin without violating the important principles that enable it to be supervised and controlled by the community have not been implemented. This has kept Bitcoin poorly developed and slow in progress causing it to become somewhat outdated, slow, clunky, difficult to use, etc. By now, it should be possible to use Bitcoin in decentralized peer-to-peer manner with very cheap fees and really fast transaction on a very advanced system that can handle alot of things imaginable, but so far  very little to nothing has been achieved. Whatever advanced solution or progress that currently exist, actually deviate from the original goal of Bitcoin and could lead to crisis.

Can you give us an example of the "good ideas that haven't been implemented"? I don't think that Bitcoin is "outdated" or "difficult to use".
OK, sometimes the transactions are slow and expensive, but this is the price we have to pay for decentralization. If you want super fast and cheap transactions maybe you should move to a centralized payment system.
The consensus mechanism of imposing new improvements to Bitcoin Core isn't perfect, but this is what makes Bitcoin great. The decisions are made by the community, not by a bunch of rich people that are hidden somewhere. If you want a better cryptocurrency, then just try to create one and see what happens.

[betswift]

Much of the good ideas proposed to help develop Bitcoin without violating the important principles that enable it to be supervised and controlled by the community have not been implemented. This has kept Bitcoin poorly developed and slow in progress causing it to become somewhat outdated, slow, clunky, difficult to use, etc. By now, it should be possible to use Bitcoin in decentralized peer-to-peer manner with very cheap fees and really fast transaction on a very advanced system that can handle alot of things imaginable, but so far  very little to nothing has been achieved. Whatever advanced solution or progress that currently exist, actually deviate from the original goal of Bitcoin and could lead to crisis.

Can you give us an example of the "good ideas that haven't been implemented"? I don't think that Bitcoin is "outdated" or "difficult to use".
OK, sometimes the transactions are slow and expensive, but this is the price we have to pay for decentralization. If you want super fast and cheap transactions maybe you should move to a centralized payment system.
The consensus mechanism of imposing new improvements to Bitcoin Core isn't perfect, but this is what makes Bitcoin great. The decisions are made by the community, not by a bunch of rich people that are hidden somewhere. If you want a better cryptocurrency, then just try to create one and see what happens.

Interested in that too from the OP's perspective.
And if someone doesn't like BTC for spikes of prices for transactions sometimes - he can just choose something different for himself  It's isn't like these spikes break something from BTC's perspective, it's just like it is.

[ABCbits]

Unfortunately, if not done right, a thing like Bitcoin, controlled and supervised by the community can be slow in progress or development compared to few people taking decisions without supervision. Much of the good ideas proposed to help develop Bitcoin without violating the important principles that enable it to be supervised and controlled by the community have not been implemented. This has kept Bitcoin poorly developed and slow in progress causing it to become somewhat outdated, slow, clunky, difficult to use, etc.

And what are example of the rejected proposal that could improve Bitcoin? OP_CAT? Drivechain? LN? Something else?

By now, it should be possible to use Bitcoin in decentralized peer-to-peer manner with very cheap fees and really fast transaction on a very advanced system that can handle alot of things imaginable, but so far  very little to nothing has been achieved. Whatever advanced solution or progress that currently exist, actually deviate from the original goal of Bitcoin and could lead to crisis.

And what makes you think it's actually possible with today's technology? While i'm in favor for modest block size increase, that alone isn't enough to achieve that. Meanwhile LN have some limitation and L2/sidechain are less decentralized.

[icalical]

What seemed like slow development on Bitcoin has, in fact, seen considerable traction on the roadmap for Layer2 scaling solutions, such as the Lightning Network, and newer creations, like BitVM. Each has targeted increased transaction speed, scalability, and handling more complex use cases, such as DeFi and applications traditionally only available on other blockchains. Though it is true that these advances sometimes come with some trade-offs, they do protect Bitcoin's truly decentralized nature, which is a core principle of value in Bitcoin to this day.

However, while some centralized alternatives do indeed provide quick fixes, they often come at the cost of security and decentralization, which Bitcoin puts a premium on. While this community driven model may appear slower, it is nonetheless in line with the original vision for Bitcoin of an open, resistant financial network. Novel developments currently under way are closing the gap in utility relative to other blockchains, while maintaining security and community control.

[hd49728]

What seemed like slow development on Bitcoin has, in fact, seen considerable traction on the roadmap for Layer2 scaling solutions, such as the Lightning Network, and newer creations, like BitVM. Each has targeted increased transaction speed, scalability, and handling more complex use cases, such as DeFi and applications traditionally only available on other blockchains. Though it is true that these advances sometimes come with some trade-offs, they do protect Bitcoin's truly decentralized nature, which is a core principle of value in Bitcoin to this day.

Layer 2 are coming more but they have pros and cons and if you want something most secure, most decentralized, it is only Bitcoin on-chain, not layer 2.

Layer 2 projects are more centralized than Layer 1 (Bitcoin on-chain) and if you want to use Layer 2, you have to sacrifice security and decentralization. It means risk will be higher and you must accept higher risk to use Bitcoin Layer 2.

Discussion on Bitcoin Layer 2.
https://www.lopp.net/bitcoin-information/other-layers.html
Sidechain Observer - Bitcoin L2 Projects & current state of development

[Peanutswar]

~

Unfortunately, if not done right, a thing like Bitcoin, controlled and supervised by the community can be slow in progress or development compared to few people taking decisions without supervision. Much of the good ideas proposed to help develop Bitcoin without violating the important principles that enable it to be supervised and controlled by the community have not been implemented. This has kept Bitcoin poorly developed and slow in progress causing it to become somewhat outdated, slow, clunky, difficult to use, etc. By now, it should be possible to use Bitcoin in decentralized peer-to-peer manner with very cheap fees and really fast transaction on a very advanced system that can handle alot of things imaginable, but so far  very little to nothing has been achieved. Whatever advanced solution or progress that currently exist, actually deviate from the original goal of Bitcoin and could lead to crisis.

Poor, deceptive and centralized alternatives have emerged, with solutions that seem to solve the Bitcoin issues, but underneath the whole thing is nothing but scams administered by greedy overlords who lack principles and have little to zero idea (or don't really care) why Bitcoin was invented in the first place

We know bitcoin is decentralized only the platform can be controlled by the institution and we know recent days they have adopted the use of the crypto currency especially bitcoin with their transactions like payment method which is some people agreed on it but others not because its volatile and they are not aware with the bitcoin too, now on the other hand, those platforms supported the use of the bitcoin or even local exchange are the one we are having an issue because those are centralized so they can easily manipulated the rule and regulations included the terms which is out of bound with the purpose of the bitcoin itself.

[Catenaccio]

We know bitcoin is decentralized only the platform can be controlled by the institution

Bitcoin is decentralized project and a decentralized blockchain too. There is no Institution can control Bitcoin, I disagree with you.

we know recent days they have adopted the use of the crypto currency especially bitcoin with their transactions like payment method which is some people agreed on it but others not because its volatile

Bitcoin has more use cases than only as a payment method, a transaction tool.

they are not aware with the bitcoin too

Bitcoin was launched in January 2009 with its Genesis block and after more than 15 years, if people are not aware of Bitcoin, it's their responsibility of missing Bitcoin or ignoring Bitcoin which is a thing can change their lives.

now on the other hand, those platforms supported the use of the bitcoin or even local exchange are the one we are having an issue because those are centralized so they can easily manipulated the rule and regulations included the terms which is out of bound with the purpose of the bitcoin itself.

You can trade Bitcoin peer to peer, on DEX but if you want to use CEX, you have to accept their centralization and risk of money loss if that exchange has something bad to happen (like hack, scam exit, bankruptcy, and more).

[joniboini]

Bitcoin is decentralized project and a decentralized blockchain too. There is no Institution can control Bitcoin, I disagree with you.

I don't think he's referring to Bitcoin since he mentioned "platform". He likely describes centralized exchanges, venture capital, investing firms, etc who are looking to use Bitcoin. I have to agree that they're constrained by government regulations.

Anyway, OP can provide detailed data to support that we're heading to a crisis or are in a crisis because Bitcoin fees are expensive. Based on mempool activity there are thousands of pending transactions which shows that the demand is still high. I have to agree that subjective bias plays a huge part when we consider something a "crisis". I also believe we won't be able to achieve high security without sacrifice at all, so demanding the network to be fast and as secure as possible is asking too much from my pov. CMIIW.

[pooya87]

You are using terms to describe Bitcoin that are not true and we have only heard them from altcoin scammers who want to sell newbies some garbage they had created to rip them off. Terms such as "slow" and "outdated" while bitcoin has the fastest transactions among all cryptocurrencies (remember fast means when the tx becomes irreversible not just when it is included in a block that can be reversed easily which is the case with most altcoins) and there has not been anything more "advanced" than Bitcoin so far to make it outdated, if it were then that altcoin would be dominating the market by now