It's been clear to me by my reading if the news that for quite a while now traditional institutions have been laughing at us because of our miserable 2-3 TX/'s bottleneck.
Bitcoin can in theory give them very high Txs/sec (and Txs/block) by centralizing the mining onto to higher powered miners.
They may not care when that centralization leads to mandatory KYC tags for all transactions on the block chain due to regulatory capture of hosted mining.
Some other individuals will care about privacy and be pissed off that Bitcoin became another fiat, and they will leave to coin that can remain decentralized and anonymous.
Similarly, because 95% has been mined, I am not so sure that people will use bitcoin over an altcoin as a means of p2p transfer. It's supply in 2024 will be far too small to facilitate hundreds of million of people buying in to actually use it. Because by 2024, either the legacy rail has taken over and bitcoin is far too expensive relative to it's supply OR, it will not have happened and bitcoin will be worth nothing. Perhaps this is too simplistic an argument to make, but 10 years is not actually very long.
It didnt use to concern me, but it does now.
Unless they are given BTC loans. The masses have always used leveraged money (fractional reserves) and not real money, because the capitalists have all the real money.
The real game here is not changing whether the masses will use leveraged money. (nothing will ever change that)
It is the game of protecting the (knowledge age) capitalists from the State (industrial age capitalists+masses).
I have argued that a Knowledge Age is replacing the Industrial Age and the age of high fixed capital is being replaced by active knowledge. Knowledge capitalists don't want to be dictated to by a State because it is incompatible with knowledge production.
I'll be impressed if your solution can operate with less than 100% degradation under a situation where all global (and regional) internet infrastructure providers are highly incentivized to attack it to oblivion and do so with vigor. A related assumption is that the U.S. NSA or a like replacement 'owns the net' and their analytical abilities of traffic down to the individual packet level are very high.
Your (or A) solution does not need to perform in such an extreme environment indefinitely but it must have a realistic potential to hold out for a period of years.
These threats are not at all far fetched to my way of thinking. A solution which cannot deal with them is simply not very interesting of valuable to me. If we don't see such an environment it means that mainstream solutions continue to work more or less as they do now, and to me they work just fine. I'm interested in how to deal with a world in which they do not.
If you assume that, then just stop now and shoot yourself. Game over. We will sink into a Dark Age and everything will be expropriated.
I assume mankind wants to fight when given the tools to do so.
The system the bastards rely on doesn't run without the knowledge capitalists. We run their system.
If even a few % of us start working on an ecosystem of solutions, they are toast.
They must obscure any takedown as DDoS or hackers, because if they simply filter data on the internet backbones, this will be a clear signal to the hackers that we've entered a war of totalitarianism. If they overtly declare war on hackerdom, they will lose and they know it.
So instead it will be proxy battle.
There is a reason they didn't let the Silkroad sites establish a following. Because once knowledge age capitalists taste freedom to profit and innovate, they don't stop innovating new ways to achieve it.
Once you build an ecosystem around true anonymity, the bastards can never put the cat bag in the bag.
Notice the gradual effort to turn Bitcoin into NWOcoin. They can't be too overt. They will go overt against a supreme threat to hegemony such as anonymous drug markets on Tor hidden servers.
So any counter-effort must be sufficiently disguised as a lower-level threat initially. And there must be a plan to enable a "force-field" protection before going to the overt threat stage.
That "force field" can entirely nullify DDoS, Sybil attacks and even make it impossible to find the nodes involved. So then when the protocol is encrypted and the "force field" is on, the bastards are toast.