Bitcoin in the next decade

[d5000]

I think still there are reasons to be more optimistic than you, @OP.

From what I have read about development in this last year, at least the current Core team seems to be still defending the decentralization paradigm. When looking at sites like Bitcoin Optech, there are some features in the pipeline which would improve privacy, as Taproot already did. For example, the currently discussed CISA idea (Cross-Input signature aggregation) would make CoinJoins very cheap and basically they could become the standard way to transact. This would give Bitcoin a level of privacy which could almost be compared with Monero.

@death69 nailed it though. The community needs to concientize itself regularly about the core values. The X discussions @OP mentioned are indeed quite frightening when we look at parts of the community for whom "security" seems to be more relevant than "privacy". This is however unfortunately a trend in whole society.

Perhaps it helps that people need to realize that censorship resistance -- which is only achievable if Bitcoin respects privacy -- is valuable. It is one of the features which differentiate Bitcoin most from traditional digital payment solutions. To say it in marketing terms, it's a core Unique Selling Propositiion (USP). This means if Bitcoin loses this characteristic, it will be less valuable, it will have less use cases.

I often bring up the example of opposition movements in dictatorships, but anyone disagreeing with an even slightly authoritarian government (let's say something like Turkey) is at risk of authorities' actions like confiscation, surveillance and censorship. But even if you live in a democracy, governments can deteriorate and become more authoritarian.

Bitcoin "with privacy" is a tool against authoritarianism. Bitcoin "without privacy" is not. If a Bitcoin "without privacy" is at $1,000,000 but you get your BTC confiscated because you posted something on the web against the government, are you more happy with that than with a privacy-supporting Bitcoin at 100,000$?

[Smartprofit]

I think that in the next decade (2031 - 2040) Bitcoin will still be a decentralized asset. Decentralization (as paradoxical as it may seem) will be preserved precisely due to the fact that the main holders of Bitcoin will be states, large corporations and investment funds.

At the same time, they will also be the largest miners of Bitcoin.

There are currently about 200 different states in the world, and they are not always in friendly partnership relations with each other. Many of these states compete very fiercely with each other. And if each of these states creates Bitcoin reserves and accumulates Bitcoins, this will ensure decentralization of Bitcoin storage. If each of these states mines Bitcoin, this will ensure decentralization of Bitcoin mining.

Thus, as paradoxical as it may sound, Bitcoin will receive a strategic benefit from the deglobalization of the modern financial system.  

At the same time, in my opinion, by the end of 2040, Bitcoin will begin to evolve from the essence of digital money towards the essence of a protocol for transferring value in virtual space.

[Obari]

I agree with you that, as much as we are getting more government recognition, I think we’re losing our privacy and that’s not  getting any funny. I truly appreciate all the rise and government acceptance but the truth is that, all of these is already making us losing the decentralization because government are already making these crypto firms bend to some very harsh that are stealing away our privacy and now most people see crypto firms that run totally decentralized as scams and not trust worthy making them as well bend to government regulation to also able to gain acceptance.

~snip~

I hope someday this paradigm would shift toward what BTC was really built up for - sure, hodling it and appreciating it like that is good too, but it's not the last step of the adoption..

I hope someday people really accept bitcoin for its actual course snd as it stands now, people are already getting scared of platforms that offer total decentralization and now embracing those ones that ask for KYC. But regardless of what the case might be, I just hope these people realize sooner what bitcoin stands for and not just some sort of rising purpose.

[bangjoe]

People joining for sometime now are only in it for the potential price increase and care nothing about a decentralized system.

Most of them today are for profit, out of 100 people who buy bitcoin, 99 of them are those who are looking for profits on the rising price of bitcoin because they treat bitcoin as an investment alternative not as a decentralized means of payment.

The ARR of bitcoin if calculated per year is very tempting, therefore also the institutions or governments make bitcoin one of the investment assets that they can rely on to get profits

No matter how government try to influence the market with their position, the core definition of bitcoin and her decentralization cannot be tarnished. If government try to build something by inviting a developer to draft out a unique feature that will drive users toward feeling unsafe about their investment, i think such cannot be possible because every transaction will reflect onchain which can be traced and tracked for public visibility.

Government are only be able to build centralized platform where your portfolio are controlled, minimum and maximum amount of withdrawals are imposed on your assets, kyc verifications are occurred for their own benefits and many more but at the end every waves of transaction are reflected onchain for public awareness, thats what government is not happy with, thats their point of weakness.

Institutions are only influencing the market price to favour them, but at the same time favours the holders too as well, so its win win for everybody not only big ventures.

No, the state can do a lot more than that my friend, they can intervene against the miners or who run the nodes or who verify the transactions, when bitcoin miners are tracked by the government they may be able to intervene them to do something, there are certainly people who say that they are spread out in the world, but the fun fact is that the government can pursue them to carry out the interests they want to do.

Because the truth is that the state is formed in principle to control whatever is in the public sphere, and I agree with the OP that Decentralization might be a sham when the government intervenes in running the system.

[Churchillvv]

Bitcoin "with privacy" is a tool against authoritarianism. Bitcoin "without privacy" is not. If a Bitcoin "without privacy" is at $1,000,000 but you get your BTC confiscated because you posted something on the web against the government, are you more happy with that than with a privacy-supporting Bitcoin at 100,000$?

Bitcoin at $100k of course retaining its privacy, I usually think to myself that if bitcoin losses the freedom to price increase what will be the fate of Satoshi coming up with bitcoin? it will begin to seem to me as a failed currency than an expensive elite currency that they are trying to make it right now.

Bitcoin has it's core tenants but it's seems like it's going to loss it once it turns into a currency or store of value for the elites.

[Abiky]

Even before the government began to show interest in Bitcoin, I had already felt within me that decentralization was gradually fading away. That is the reason I created this post: Why use decentralized Bitcoin in a centralized way?. Many people gave reasons why they are still using Bitcoin in a centralized way, one of which is that people are still stuck with the traditional financial system. They don't care much about privacy; they just want to get returns from their investments.

Saying the government's interest will likely cause decentralization and privacy to fade away is like looking for an excuse to justify what we are already guilty of. In years to come, we should expect more regulations from the government through the exchanges, and we will still gladly comply because, truly, only very few really care about decentralization.

Decentralization might be fading away. But not to a point where all hope is lost. "Wall Street" still doesn't control network nodes and miners. At least, not yet. They can own all of the BTC they want, but at the end of the day, nodes ultimately decide the path Bitcoin will take ("One CPU, One Vote").

Undoubtely, most people only want to make money with Bitcoin. So they wouldn't care if governments and "Wall Street" giants centralize the Blockchain in the future. As long as prices keep going up, nothing else matters. Bitcoiners like you and me are smart and will not be deceived. They will do whatever it takes to help resist centralization. Let's hope most of the BTC in circulation stays in the hands of "We the People" for Bitcoin's own good. Just my two sats.

[Wakate]

Bitcoin "with privacy" is a tool against authoritarianism. Bitcoin "without privacy" is not. If a Bitcoin "without privacy" is at $1,000,000 but you get your BTC confiscated because you posted something on the web against the government, are you more happy with that than with a privacy-supporting Bitcoin at 100,000$?

Bitcoin at $100k of course retaining its privacy, I usually think to myself that if bitcoin losses the freedom to price increase what will be the fate of Satoshi coming up with bitcoin? it will begin to seem to me as a failed currency than an expensive elite currency that they are trying to make it right now.

Bitcoin has it's core tenants but it's seems like it's going to loss it once it turns into a currency or store of value for the elites.

There might be a problem very soon because the rate at which huge institutions are buying and storing Bitcoin, this could become a big problem to many of us that are holding units. Bitcoin is meant to be traders but people are seeing it from the other aspect of investing. The keep holding their Bitcoin just to make money from the market when the price goes bullish.

Bitcoin is seen as a financial asset which is why many countries are investing in Bitcoin so they could hold for as long as possible and sell when they have made enough profits from the market. They could also use this pattern to control the price of Bitcoin to their own favour. This is not going to be a predictable market anymore by the time most of these whales have the tendency to shake the market through the numbers of Bitcoin they have.

[fuguebtc]

Bitcoin "with privacy" is a tool against authoritarianism. Bitcoin "without privacy" is not. If a Bitcoin "without privacy" is at $1,000,000 but you get your BTC confiscated because you posted something on the web against the government, are you more happy with that than with a privacy-supporting Bitcoin at 100,000$?

A really interesting question, and it would come as no surprise that many people would quickly choose bitcoin "with privacy" and priced at $100k over bitcoin without privacy and priced at $1 million. But in reality, do most people still choose that? I mean , if people are honest, I don't think many people would pick it up.

Because what most people are looking for is profit, profit always comes first, not privacy .
What I observe is that only investors on this forum still care about privacy. But through other social networks, the rest of the market cares more about profits than anything else ,  and many people are not even aware of the decentralization or privacy that bitcoin can bring.

[SuperBitMan]

Bitcoin "with privacy" is a tool against authoritarianism. Bitcoin "without privacy" is not. If a Bitcoin "without privacy" is at $1,000,000 but you get your BTC confiscated because you posted something on the web against the government, are you more happy with that than with a privacy-supporting Bitcoin at 100,000$?

A really interesting question, and it would come as no surprise that many people would quickly choose bitcoin "with privacy" and priced at $100k over bitcoin without privacy and priced at $1 million. But in reality, do most people still choose that? I mean , if people are honest, I don't think many people would pick it up.

Because what most people are looking for is profit, profit always comes first, not privacy .
What I observe is that only investors on this forum still care about privacy. But through other social networks, the rest of the market cares more about profits than anything else ,  and many people are not even aware of the decentralization or privacy that bitcoin can bring.

The reason why Bitcoin has gotten to this point or level is because of it decentralization or privacy nature, Bitcoin was able to gain the trust of many investors today because of this so if that decentralization or privacy is taken away from Bitcoin a lot of investors will stop investing in Bitcoin and that will be the end of Bitcoin.

Few people would quickly choose bitcoin "with privacy" and priced at $100k over bitcoin without privacy and priced at $1 million, why many will choose the opposite, reasoning being that people are investing on Bitcoin for the profit, if Bitcoin don't give profit I'm sure 90 percent of people wouldn't accumulate bitcoin to get privacy, all this nation and state in some countries that are accepting Bitcoin reserve policy are only doing it because of the profit they believe Bitcoin can give them however I don't think they can accept Bitcoin reserve policy if Bitcoin had no decentralization or privacy.

The point I'm trying to make is that without decentralization or privacy Nature of Bitcoin I don't think people will even invest in Bitcoin, Bitcoin decentralization or privacy is still the reason people and nations are considering it not just the profit.
Less risk in Bitcoin is provided by decentralization.

[fuguebtc]

The reason why Bitcoin has gotten to this point or level is because of it decentralization or privacy nature, Bitcoin was able to gain the trust of many investors today because of this so if that decentralization or privacy is taken away from Bitcoin a lot of investors will stop investing in Bitcoin and that will be the end of Bitcoin.

Few people would quickly choose bitcoin "with privacy" and priced at $100k over bitcoin without privacy and priced at $1 million, why many will choose the opposite, reasoning being that people are investing on Bitcoin for the profit, if Bitcoin don't give profit I'm sure 90 percent of people wouldn't accumulate bitcoin to get privacy, all this nation and state in some countries that are accepting Bitcoin reserve policy are only doing it because of the profit they believe Bitcoin can give them however I don't think they can accept Bitcoin reserve policy if Bitcoin had no decentralization or privacy.

The point I'm trying to make is that without decentralization or privacy Nature of Bitcoin I don't think people will even invest in Bitcoin, Bitcoin decentralization or privacy is still the reason people and nations are considering it not just the profit.
Less risk in Bitcoin is provided by decentralization.

Early investors invested in bitcoin because of its decentralization but that is changing and what investors today care about is returns. As I said, I even see many people who don't know that bitcoin is a decentralized currency, they only know that bitcoin can bring huge profits and can make them rich.


I believe that even if bitcoin is centralized, people will still invest in it as long as it still gives great returns. The proof is that there are a lot of people investing in bitcoin but still investing in centralized altcoins. If people valued privacy, altcoins wouldn't exist, CEXs wouldn't have such a large customer base and liquidity. Or there won't be billions of dollars pouring into bitcoin but through ETFs, centralized institutions.

[ruykeri]

Bitcoin has always been about protecting its own privacy. Hopefully, this will not be an exception in the future.The first and main feature that made Bitcoin popular was its decentralization. Decentralization is not just a technology, it is a foundation for building trust on it . However, in recent times, people's interest in Bitcoin has increased due to its relatively high price.
Finally, I would like to say one thing: the popularity of Bitcoin and its value will be much higher in the future.The way the world's leading economists, including most richest person in the world and heads of government are showing interest in Bitcoin undoubtedly indicates that the value of Bitcoin in the future will be several times higher than in the past decade.

[jcojci]

Since the government heard about Bitcoin, they researched to know more. They don't act aggressively like today because they don't think Bitcoin can be like today. But when Bitcoin soar to the highest price or after Covid-19, they realize something is coming and they need to do something. Then, they are trying to regulate many businesses by imposing KYC on the customer. Since that moment, Bitcoin has not fully decentralized, I mean Bitcoin itself is still decentralized but when you use Bitcoin, buying and selling or use it for payment systems, there you need to do KYC.

Until now and then, Bitcoin is still decentralized, but when you use any business services, you need to do KYC because that is regulated by the government. Bitcoin in the next decade maybe will be stricter than now but that depends on the government because we live in a country with the government.

With more businesses or companies involved in Bitcoin, the government will apply KYC to them especially their customer. The government want the taxes from the business and when you use Bitcoin in a large amount, they will be happy to impose you with high taxes.

Maybe I am wrong, so I apologize for my lack.

[peter0425]

Bitcoin "with privacy" is a tool against authoritarianism. Bitcoin "without privacy" is not. If a Bitcoin "without privacy" is at $1,000,000 but you get your BTC confiscated because you posted something on the web against the government, are you more happy with that than with a privacy-supporting Bitcoin at 100,000$?

A really interesting question, and it would come as no surprise that many people would quickly choose bitcoin "with privacy" and priced at $100k over bitcoin without privacy and priced at $1 million. But in reality, do most people still choose that? I mean , if people are honest, I don't think many people would pick it up.

Just look at how much people are buying bitcoin through ETF. Yes a lot of people first got interested in bitcoin due to the privacy it offers but now the rest are interested in making profit above all. No matter what is the cost, they want to buy hold and make profit when the right time comes.

[Ambatman]

It’s strange. People cheer institutional money, like the very entities Bitcoin was meant to route around have become the final validators of its legitimacy. There’s comfort in that. There’s also a trap. You already see it: privacy advocates treated like malcontents, cypherpunk principles reduced to marketing copy, self-custody slowly becoming optional, then weird, then suspect.

And Sadly it's very effective. Our bottom line is readjusted and goes lower by the day.
I don't really blame the government, I'd do same if I was in their shoes.

Can it be stopped? Maybe. But only if enough people get uncomfortable enough to defend the old ideas. The miners, the node runners, the devs who remember why they started.

and Realize that short term gains are nothing but bait.
Most animals hunted by hunters tested the generosity of the hunter before being taken off by the trap.

[fuguebtc]

A really interesting question, and it would come as no surprise that many people would quickly choose bitcoin "with privacy" and priced at $100k over bitcoin without privacy and priced at $1 million. But in reality, do most people still choose that? I mean , if people are honest, I don't think many people would pick it up.

Just look at how much people are buying bitcoin through ETF. Yes a lot of people first got interested in bitcoin due to the privacy it offers but now the rest are interested in making profit above all. No matter what is the cost, they want to buy hold and make profit when the right time comes.

It is the naked truth but many people do not dare to admit it, including us. We are also focused on profits, not as concerned about decentralization and privacy as before. If you pay attention, you will see more and more topics, praises related to ETFs, governments, institutions investing in bitcoin or bitcoin presidents...everything seems to focus on bitcoin price. There is not much discussion anymore about privacy, decentralization.

[Arenga pinnata]

I know we survived without government support and can survive without it but What are your thoughts on the direction we heading?

The entry of several state governments towards Bitcoin adoption has actually indicated that Bitcoin's victory is indeed in sight. In the past, some governments even considered bitcoin itself like it was a scam or something or unsafe and something like that. But now we look at the positive side. Bitcoin is now more recognized for its security. Several countries have even mining bitcoin independently. Like the country of Bhutan. And several countries make bitcoin a legal means of payment such as El Salvador and several others.

Then big companies are now also taking the same steps and are enthusiastic about Bitcoin. They also encourage classic investors to join in the bitcoin hype through the Bitcoin ETF they created.

So I think what is wrong here is the small investors who only see short-term profits. But look at governments and large companies, it seems they are now the ones who are most convinced of the potential of bitcoin itself. Or I will exclude state governments because most of them don't have bitcoin because they have accumulated it but they have it as a result of confiscation.

Regarding awareness of decentralization and privacy, it actually seems to be decreasing. But that doesn't change that bitcoin remains decentralized.

[DeathAngel]

In ten years Bitcoin will be a even more of a mainstream asset used as both digital gold & a hedge against inflation. Governments may regulate it more tightly but adoption will grow especially in unstable economies. Price swings will remain but long term confidence in its value & role in the global financial system will solidify. It’s not going anywhere.

[Abiky]

In ten years Bitcoin will be a even more of a mainstream asset used as both digital gold & a hedge against inflation. Governments may regulate it more tightly but adoption will grow especially in unstable economies. Price swings will remain but long term confidence in its value & role in the global financial system will solidify. It’s not going anywhere.

It won't be going anywhere within the next 10 years. BUT, Bitcoin will be less-decentralized as institutions accumulate a large portion of the circulating supply. That's without keeping in mind that such entities can build their own mining farms and run their own nodes, aiming to become the dominant force in Bitcoin's network consensus. Is this the future Satoshi wanted? I doubt it. Satoshi created Bitcoin with cypherpunk/libertarian ideals in mind. He brought BTC to the world after banks' mishandling of the economy in 2008 (Great Financial Crisis). If he wanted the same failures of these financial institutions, do you think he would've created a system free from middlemen?

Allowing governments and institutional firms to infiltrate Bitcoin, would bring us back to the era of centralized banking. The middleman isn't going away anytime soon. CEX are still dominant and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. For true decentralization and freedom, I'd prefer Monero or Litecoin instead. But to each, their own.

[Publictalk792]

In ten years Bitcoin will be a even more of a mainstream asset used as both digital gold & a hedge against inflation. Governments may regulate it more tightly but adoption will grow especially in unstable economies. Price swings will remain but long term confidence in its value & role in the global financial system will solidify. It’s not going anywhere.

Yes exactly in ten years Bitcoin will likely be much bigger part of world money system. People see it as digital gold because there is limited amount and it can help protect against rising prices especially in countries with unstable economies where more and more people are using it. While governments might regulate it more this could actually help it grow by making it seem more legitimate and attracting even more buyers. Even though its price will still go up and down people will trust its long term value more as more folks use it and understand its role. As you said it is not going anywhere.

[batang_bitcoin]

A really interesting question, and it would come as no surprise that many people would quickly choose bitcoin "with privacy" and priced at $100k over bitcoin without privacy and priced at $1 million. But in reality, do most people still choose that? I mean , if people are honest, I don't think many people would pick it up.

Because what most people are looking for is profit, profit always comes first, not privacy .
What I observe is that only investors on this forum still care about privacy. But through other social networks, the rest of the market cares more about profits than anything else ,  and many people are not even aware of the decentralization or privacy that bitcoin can bring.

I would reckon that, I check posts on pages and accounts on socials about the comment there when it's about profits. Most of them would agree to just give up privacy and will take the profit with them. That is what I've noticed that despite the importance of privacy but when the profit is in front, many won't hesitate to take it. While many of us advocates about privacy, it changes the narrative when the money comes in front of us. Like for example of what this worldcoin does, people sell their personal identities, biometrics/iris for small payments.
- Worldcoin faces bans worldwide amid increasing privacy fears