The Future Of Bitcoin

What lies ahead for Bitcoin?
When Bitcoin was first introduced in 2009, it was heralded both as the new currency of the internet and of the modern data-transparent era. Born in the rubble of the financial meltdown, the cryptocurrency—which lacks a centralized bank or government and controls transactions via a community-run, public ledger or “blockchain”—was seen as a way to “decentralise” money, and thus remove it from the power and greed that so often taints financial systems.
Slowly but surely over the past six or so years, Bitcoin has grown in prominence and usage. Though a large proportion of its users are from the so-called “dark web”, or using the currency to pay for illicit and illegal substances and products, other major companies began accepting it as payment too, including Reddit and WordPress. However, in recent weeks there have been several cracks in the infrastructure and reputation of Bitcoin, leaving questions looming large about the state of its future.
It all started when one of Bitcoin’s most prominent developers, Alex Heard, announced publicly that he was leaving Bitcoin after five years and selling all of his shares of the currency. He did so in a lengthy and public post on the blogging site Medium, the go-to platform for the technology world to make public denouncements and air grievances. He boldly stated in the post that “Bitcoin has failed”, writing that the primary reason is fundamental and ideological: “What was meant to be a new, decentralised form of money that lacked ‘systemically important institutions’ and ‘too big to fail’ has become something even worse: a system completely controlled by just a handful of people.”
In response to Heard’s announcement, Bitcoin quickly began to suffer. VentureBeat reported that the company swiftly “lost over 13% of its value to settle at below $365 for the first time since early December last year. That’s a long fall from the net gain of 35% last year that made it the best performing currency of 2015.”
Despite the marked impact Heard’s departure had on the company, not everyone agrees with his assessment of the company. Another high profile Bitcoin developer, Gavin Andersen said “Mike is too pessimistic”. While many commenters on the Bitcoin sub-Reddit said that while Heard made some valid points, his stance that Bitcoin has failed outright is overblown.  
At this stage, the future of Bitcoin is uncertain. However, the larger notion of a “cryptocurrency” that allows people to have money that’s not beholden to a centralised power structure isn’t going anywhere—especially in an internet age where transparency and collectivism are valued over hierarchy and ruthless capitalism. Whether Bitcoin manages to revitalize its image and fix divisions within its communities or another platform crops up to replace it, the community clearly has some work to do in addressing the major critiques that Heard put forth in his screed, to see how developers and activists might improve the future of cryptocurrency.
Heard believes that the “blockchain”—or the group of individuals, called miners, who vet and verify the ledger of transactions—is too small. This means that power is in the hands of too few people (which is kind of like a conventional financial system) and that transactions happen too slowly due to the manpower needed to complete them.
However, when it comes to increasing this transaction limit, Heard pointed out the major rift in the 5-person team that runs Bitcoin Core is a major limiting factor. As Mashable reported in the wake of the controversy, “Two of the five want to improve the network limit [of transactions], while the other three want to keep it where it is. Hearn writes that this schism has created a sort of civil war in the community. Some fear that increasing the limit will make decentralization more difficult.”
While the future is unknown, it’s clear that Heard has struck a nerve in the Bitcoin community. It will be up to cryptocurrency enthusiasts to fight for a more efficient and functional future of the platform.