Quote from: ivanrsj on January 31, 2020, 12:07:43 PM

Bitcoin has a tough governance, almost immutable via hardforks when it needs, always creating another coins instead of solving or improving the technical rules.

It could be perfect over decades as SOV, but as a softfork's hostage, some basic implements could be impossible to make, becoming it outdated.

You have no idea what you're talking about. There's a very good reason why Bitcoin is hard to change. Any coin that is easy to change will not survive. I highly advise you to start thinking from the perspective of somebody who doesn't own Decred nor Bitcoin and you'll find that your bias affects your beliefs very strongly. Bitcoin governance has shown that in the event of an imminent thread (see inflation Bug 2019), all genuine actors (which represents almost everyone, regardless of politics) will swiftly (and sometimes even blindly - which is bad) act to re-secure the network. Any claims of "being outdated" is also nonsense.

Quote from: Ferdo on January 31, 2020, 03:06:09 PM

- fees & speed
- privacy

Won't shill other coins here but I presume people who think alike know which ones I'm referring to.

I think these 3 areas are main threats for BTC.

No, they are not. The cost of transactions is a deterrent against bloating it to the point of centralizing it. Too much privacy on layer 1, and regulators will throw your coin into the bin. Speed, what speed? All transactions are near instant. Fast confirmations =/= secure confirmations. The former is worthless in comparison to the latter.

Don't read advice from Medium, Telegram, Twitter et. al. "Crypto enthusiasts", they usually don't even have half the knowledge that they claim to. Decred, like only a couple other altcoins which stand out, is a good test bed for new technologies that may work in theory but may not work in practice (we can't know until we try). That's about it as far as to the actual usability and worth of these networks goes (today - may change in the future).