| > Lightning is a UX disaster Lightning absolutely was a UX disaster, but things are improving quickly. There are wallets now that manage your funds completely without the notion of channels, and thats how it should be for most users. You don't even care whats going on under the hood, because it's all automatically managed. > Store-of-value is something that Monero can do better Monero has worse scaling issues than Bitcoin and is even harder to use for most people. > Instant transactions is something that NANO has solved Every design decision is a trade off. Something free and instant is also infinitely spammable. If every transaction requires a PoW, its not actually free, and if it's easy enough for a phone to do, its 1000x easier for an ASIC to do, and still doesn't prevent spam. No one wants to actually store spam data forever, and a lot of blockchains have the issue no one one is actually incentivized to store the crap forever, and _someone_ has to. I completely agree Bitcoin, at it's base layer could be a better protocol, but nearly every other protocol you'll encounter has made design trade offs that make it less decentralized in the long term |
MimbleWimble makes pretty good tradeoffs. It improves on both privacy and scalability, while sacrificing transparent supply auditability.
It also does away with all the bitcoin script complexity while still supporting most functionality with "scriptless scripts" including multisig outputs, atomic swaps, discreet log contracts, and even payment channels.