You guys know the ins and outs of Bitcoin and likely have a clearer view of it's challenges and problems.
Given free reign to make immediate changes to bitcoin, what would you change? (discarding any worries about forking and or effects on value)
I suppose I could be mistaken, but this question sounds a lot like:
"I'm planning on making an altcoin. What features should I add that will make it popular enough to make me rich?"
Sadly, I can see why.
Even though, say that is what motivates me, would there be anything wrong with a new altcoin that really explores alternative maybe more efficient ways of handling the tasks?
No, nothing wrong with an altcoin that implements significant new ideas (although 99.99% of them don't). But such discussion belongs in the altcoin subforum.
I don't subscribe to the school of "bitcoin only".
Nor do I. I also use U.S. dollars, and Euros. There is plenty of room in the world economy for multiple currencies.
The mentality that Bitcoin should be the all of digital currencies will lead to problems on the future, as a community we need to freely discuss and develop our ideas because noone will.
Perhaps. This forum is pretty lenient and allows discussion on just about any legal topic as long as it is in the correct sub-forum.
98% of this forum is interested in profit only, not the ideas, technology or philosophy of it all.
That really depends on which sub-forums you spend most of your time in. If you hang out in the mining or altcoin forums, you'll find it difficult to identify anyone that isn't focused on profit. The development and technical support forums tend to be less focused on profits.
But don't take my word for it , I'd just pose the same question to you:
Would you not be curious to know what the core developers current and past would do in a completely seperate currency?
There is already a list of such things.
For example , the originator, be it a man, a team or an alien, after studying how it has performed, what changes would they make.
His interests don't really interest me. He was a mediocre programmer with a well thought out concept for distributed consensus. His concept is revolutionary, but that doesn't mean that all his thoughts are important.
Even theoretical ideas would be interesting as they open up room for innovation.
Certainly.
This raises an interesting question, maybe I'll open up another discussion on it. Say Satoshi finally gets out of Guantanamo and he's got new ideas that either aren't compatible with bitcoin, or are so drastic that even a hard fork would entail huge network/consenus issues and maybe loss of value.
He could create a new altcoin and try to convince people that it was a significant enough improvement to abandon bitcoin. Just like everyone else with such ideas. There is nothing "special" about the fact that the ideas belong to him.
What would he do and what would be the community response if he did not reveal his identity?
No way to know what he would do. I would expect that the community would respond with skepticism and that the idea would need to stand on its own merits for it to become accepted.
Would it be lost in the Alt black hole?
That's where it would belong.
If he did reveal himself , would community mentality change, re-labelling BTC as an alternative to his new creation?
I would hope not, but it's difficult to predict what effect crowd mentality can have. I never expected the word "bits" to catch on for microbitcoin, and yet it seems that is has. Crowds can do some pretty silly things sometimes.
We all know that there is nearly a religion surrounding the name now.
For some, perhaps.
