Given that they have had 34 some odd drafts and continuous errors, with some still not fixed, QUIC is not confidence-inspiring. As an ordinary internet user, the problem I see is that QUIC development is being led by companies, not academics,1 that see the internet first and foremost as an advertising and commerce medium, as would be expected since they are companies pursuing business interests. The issues around those commercial uses are prioritised while issues around ordinary internet user privacy and control are secondary. Certainly QUIC is not the first2 and and will not be the only UDP-based reliable transport protocol but what will be interesting is whether firewall administrators will treat all the alternatives equally. It may be that the corporate-sponsored ones like QUIC are allowed through while ones written by academics or other non-commercial authors are not.

1. Many of the people leading development of the older HTTP versions were academics.

2. See, e.g., CurveCP: https://curvecp.org Having played around with CurveCP before QUIC existed, and having already thought CurveCP was amazing, the later commercial effort led by Google has left me underwhelmed.