How can it be Bitcoin if it's completely different technology? Bitcoin is what it is because of the protocol, the code, the mining process. If you propose something completely different, it's not longer Bitcoin anymore.
Also - how can I mine BTC-U? Does BTC-U has open source code on github and everyone can propose a change to it?
One of the big issues with BTC is PoW. Mining was a MEANS to an end, not the end itself! Many Bitcoiners (mostly miners!) tend to forget that. The idea is to decentralize/distribute power. It doesn't matter what method you use. Delegated Proof Of Stake (DPOS) is superior to Proof Of Work (PoW) in every way.
BTC would thus benefit immensely from this upgrade to BTC-U
Yeah, Ive seen superior dpos when steem whitneses were buying votes on steemit. Its not real decentralization in my opinion which doesnt mean it cant have its place on the market.
Real decentralization then is when three Big Mining companies operating in an authoritarian country control over half the hash power? Or does it help to add three more big mining pools where all the members of each pool are doing is working to find hash codes for the one operator who gets to decide what software gets run? There are far fewer people choosing that software in Bitcoin than there are in BitShares and in BitShares they are chosen by the shareholders based on their earned reputations - not based on self-appointed ownership of processing power. You can vote out a bad node in BitShares and it has to rebuild its reputation to play again - almost impossible. Bitcoin can't stop a bad actor from hashing with their hash power forever.
Bitcoin is completely coercible by compromising just a few people. Power is forced to be distributed uniformly among BitShare's elected witnesses. Find them and coerce them and new witnesses pop up elsewhere automagically. Try that in Bitcoin.
For Bitcoin we have #UASF - the users, as a community, forced the miners to enable SegWit. It shows who really controls Bitcoin.
Good improvement, which proves we were right with DPOS.
Now, when will bitcoin start to catch up in performance?
Answer: When we remove the miners for them.
LN looks promissing but we will see :)
Worth reading this medium article re:LN:
Mathematical Proof That the Lightning Network Cannot Be a Decentralized Bitcoin Scaling Solution
I answered that question in this post:
The Platform Independence Movement
It's bitcoin in that it's an identical distribution at the time of snapshot, so everyone that holds btc will be eligible to acquire an equal amount in btc-u. Is bitcoin not worth something because of the userbase behind it?
You can't. There would be no more BTC-U created after the initial snapshot issuance, no miners to pay for maintenance as it will be running on top of the BTS DEX which is a self-sustaining DAC.
BTC-U doesn't need its own dedicated client (though you can create one) nor a dedicated blockchain, the BTS DEX (Bitshares) is entirely open source right now on GitHub and MIT licensed. Anyone can indeed propose a change to Bitshares via BSIPs and voting.
A dedicated client for BTC-U would be one honking good idea. Make adoption really really easy!
Wouldn't be difficult at all to do, you can easily customize and host your own BTC-U themed BTS DEX (web wallet).
Not only because of that.
Certainly not, however its distribution and established userbase is massively valuable, followed by its service/exchange integration then the brand awareness. In terms of tech specs, it's back in the stone age currently.
I think the BTC name drives demand at this point. After that its about building use cases and letting mainstream decide which one is the most secure and technologically viable.