Haven't had my coffee yet,so this will be a little jumbled
It seems that somewhere along the development of bitcoin, the conversation drifted from how do we make this a functioning currency to how can this currency make me rich. (yes i'm overgeneralizing by a lot) now, contrary to the beliefs of some capital-L Libertarians, I don't actually think that a bunch of people trying to get rich actually automatically results in the best outcome for everyone. I guess my worry is that due to the value of bitcoin, we have moved out of the experimentation phase, but I don't think bitcoin -- in either the software sense or in the conceptual sense -- is ready to move out of that experiment phase.
And yes, obviously part of the answer to this is the code is open source, create a new blockchain with other features if you want. BUT I have the feeling that even if a far superior (you can define that in you head however you want) p2p cryptocurrency emerged next week, there would be tons of people on here trying to convince people NOT to use it just because they know that it would decrease the value of their bitcoins.
Does that make sense?
i largely agree with the sentiment and think you've put it well. i don't trace the problem in quite the same way to the direct incentives that the current block chain provides, however. that may be part of the problem (that bitcoin grew too quickly and crowded out experimentation now that people feel they have a stake in the currently prominent block chain), but i also think there's simply a social dysfunction in the forum that's bled over into the development group.
bitcoin unfortunately is very difficult to change. some of that's down to the inflexibility of the core protocol, but there are accidental, less productive reasons for that problem as well. adjusting the code of the mainline client requires more skill than contributing to other open-source projects, and few people - even among those who have actually contributed code - have a good understanding of all pieces of bitcoin. most programmers have the capacity to write the same kind of program over and over, and bitcoin falls into a gap that demands a collection of skills that few people have. also, the main c++ client isn't written in a way that makes it easy for most people to understand. that discourages contribution, and then, among the relative handful of us remaining who could help, the bizarre extremism of the community here serves as an additional deterrent. development of the mainline client proceeds very slowly and cautiously as a result, without much apparent desire to experiment.
in any case, putting that all aside, i still agree with you. i've long said that the current block chain is a barrier to bitcoin's general adoption and will likely prevent it from growing in a way that actually helps the world meaningfully, and that's a shame. i'd trade my 12000+ bitcoins in that chain for a different community and a more flexible system, but no way to do that occurs to me. i've sometimes thought of simply trying to start an alternative block chain with a version of the client that implements a variety of the best changes that have been suggested in the forum, and then working with contacts at a moderately sized regional bank in the united states to get them to promote it and serve as a regulated, legitimate onshore exchange, but i'm waiting to see what happens with the current wave of regulatory efforts there first.
When a better cryptocurrency comes along, no argument from a bunch of forum users is going to stop people from choosing the better product.
Of course we will. As long as that better cryptocurrency gets a fair shot at making the market aware of itself the market is going to eventually switch over to it.
as is common in what passes for economic reasoning in these forums, having faith in these beliefs ignores network effects and all other costs of transition. it also ignores the very significant dishonest marketing push that the currently prominent block chain gets as a result of the efforts of people in this forum.
