None of these technologies are dominant enough. Not a single one is a usable product.

All cannot support a large number of transactions, not even those that do not have proof of work. There's research-level problems being solved (like bulletproofs for compact private transaction - hides amounts). After research is done there's engineering. Then testing until it is ready to use.

People really don't realize how early this is.

Lightning network, a proposed solution for Bitcoin scaling problem, was announced 2 years ago, and they identified many issues with it since then. There's talks of layer number 3 etc.

This is way too early and there's no winner. Bunch of cryptocurrencies are riding on the research-wave behind Bitcoin.

Any next system is likely to be bootstrapped from Bitcoin. That's the crucial difference.

This is crucial in the midst of loose and fast comparisons between technologies in the past and what we have now. Can a piece of complicated software like Bitcoin be re-engineered from the ground up? Yes, certainly, but that is a tough road to take, I would think, if you want to do what Bitcoin does at its core.

Bitcoin, the software, solves basic problems very well and is thus the basis of many altcoins.

I'll invest in the next big coin if it is significantly better than Bitcoin while continuing to maintain Bitcoin's core value argument.

Where is your second internet?

There's always the chance that you can evolve and improve upon the technology instead of something else coming to replace it.

For bitpay's usecase Bitcoin is being replaced by other coins because it fails to embrace on-chain scaling in favor of off-chain scaling which is far from ready. This is exactly as predicted.

Yep. If you want to get your transactions tracked by the chinese government, it is cheap. Like PayPal. If you want your transactions to be private, you use a decentralized blockchain like bitcoin.

I'm sorry but your continued comments in this thread are just play wrong.

> If you want to get your transactions tracked by the chinese government

That's such a stupid thing to say as with an open ledger everyone can track your transactions.

> If you want your transactions to be private, you use a decentralized blockchain like bitcoin.

You don't even know what a private transaction is. Bitcoin has an open ledger and all transactions are exactly as traceable.

If you don't run your own node, which is the aim of bcash, your ip address is tied to your payment. You have the payment processor, and the node, and the miner, all sharing the same information.

The chinese government appreciates your compliance with its crypto implementation.

Are you posting on the ARPANET?

I use email almost every day, yes.

You realize the arpanet is the internet right? It wasn't replaced, it was expanded. Call it layers if that would make it easier to understand.

ARPANET refers to a specific network that was decommissioned in 1990. And for 13 years of it's 21 years in existence, it was using NCP rather than TCP/IP.

I worked at BBN Technologies in the early 2000's. I was always amazed at how a company that essentially co-founded the internet and had the second domain name ever registered[1] could basically go out of business.

You just made me think that Bitcoin could definitely be the ARPANET of blockchains and Core devs could be BBN. Don't get me wrong, I worked with some extremely smart people, but in the end, Raytheon bought the whole company.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_oldest_currently_r...

The difference of course, is that bitcoin isn't a company. And the arpanet turned into the internet. But companies come and go. By your analogy, raytheon owns the internet.

You're right, Bitcoin is not a company, it's a technology. This is the analogy I'd make.

Then (Internet) / Now (Cryptocurrencies)

  NCP[1] == Blockchain based decentralized consensus
  ARPANET == Bitcoin
  BBN Technologies == Blockstream
  TCP/IP == We are figuring this out right now
  Internet == We are figuring this out right now

The ARPANET turned into the Internet in the fact that parts of it were used to build TCP/IP and the modern Internet. Just like concepts from Bitcoin will eventually be used to build whatever decentralized byzantine fault tolerant mechanism we end up with in ten years. I don't think Bitcoin is the Internet, Bitcoin is the ARPANET. Also, I wouldn't say Raytheon owns the Internet. Today the Internet is owned and controlled by many different parties all built on the TCP/IP stack. Countries like China own their own internet.

In my mind, all of this work to find different decentralized consensus algorithms is work to build transport layer (OSI Model[2]). Bitcoin is an early application, but thousands of applications are now popping up, competing, and building healthier communities.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Control_Program

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model

And the bitcoin node software i use today is version 0.15.1, not 0.8.0. The segwit block structure is different to the original implementation. One turned into the other. Nothing is stopping you running a 0.8.0 node of course. But the newer implementation has more functionality.

right MySpace, was a technology?, I think they were build on php or so, was a slow site, Google is not a technology either, golang it is, and is somehow revolutionary through simplicity and first-ish.

Agreed! Bridges aren't technologies either, only rivets and steel beams! I keep telling people, but they just won't listen.

Cars? Not a technology, only wheels and motors are technologies.