1. **Lack of transparency and accountability**: Mircea Popescu criticizes the BTC dev team for being opaque and unresponsive to the community. For example, in the Bitcoin-Assets log from [February 24, 2014](http://log.bitcoin-assets.com//?date=24-Feb-2014#541474), he argues that the team's lack of transparency and accountability is a symptom of a larger problem within the BTC dev team.

2. **Incompetence and lack of expertise**: Popescu questions the technical competence of the BTC dev team, citing examples of poor coding and inefficient solutions. In the Trilema log from [June 22, 2015](http://log.trilema.com//?date=22-Jun-2015#1241915), he criticizes the team's handling of the block size debate and argues that they lack a deep understanding of the underlying economics and game theory of Bitcoin.

3. **Centralization and authoritarianism**: He criticizes the BTC dev team for consolidating power and ignoring the decentralized nature of Bitcoin. For example, in the NoSuchLabs log from [March 15, 2016](http://log.nosuchlabs.com//?date=15-Mar-2016#1333339), he argues that the team's actions are undermining the very principles of Bitcoin.

4. **Block size limit and scaling**: Popescu disagrees with the BTC dev team's decision to maintain the 1 MB block size limit, which he believes stifles the growth and adoption of Bitcoin. In the Bitcoin-Assets log from [February 1, 2016](http://log.bitcoin-assets.com//?date=01-Feb-2016#509011), he argues that the block size limit is a major obstacle to Bitcoin's scalability and that a hard fork is necessary to increase the block size.

5. **Segregated Witness (SegWit) and its implications**: He criticizes the implementation of SegWit, which he believes is a flawed solution that compromises the security and integrity of the Bitcoin network. In the Trilema log from [August 2, 2017](http://log.trilema.com//?date=02-Aug-2017#1759305), he argues that SegWit was pushed through without proper testing, debate, or consideration of its long-term consequences.

6. **The "Core" narrative and propaganda**: Popescu accuses the BTC dev team of creating a false narrative around the "Core" brand, which he believes is used to manipulate public opinion, suppress dissent, and maintain control over the network. In the NoSuchLabs log from [May 22, 2017](http://log.nosuchlabs.com//?date=22-May-2017#1544444), he argues that this narrative is designed to confuse and mislead the public about the true nature of the Bitcoin protocol.

7. **Conflict of interest and corruption**: He suggests that some members of the BTC dev team have conflicts of interest, such as being employed by companies that benefit from their decisions, or holding significant amounts of altcoins that compete with Bitcoin. In the Bitcoin-Assets log from [January 15, 2018](http://log.bitcoin-assets.com//?date=15-Jan-2018#630111), he argues that these conflicts of interest undermine the integrity of the Bitcoin protocol and lead to decisions that benefit special interests rather than the broader community.

8. **Lack of vision and stagnation**: Popescu argues that the BTC dev team lacks a clear vision for the future of Bitcoin, leading to stagnation and a lack of innovation. In the Trilema log from [February 20, 2019](http://log.trilema.com//?date=20-Feb-2019#2211144), he argues that this stagnation will ultimately lead to the decline of Bitcoin's relevance and adoption.

Some specific examples of these criticisms can be found in the following logs:

* [Bitcoin-Assets log from February 24, 2014](http://log.bitcoin-assets.com//?date=24-Feb-2014#541474): Popescu criticizes the BTC dev team's lack of transparency and accountability.

* [Trilema log from June 22, 2015](http://log.trilema.com//?date=22-Jun-2015#1241915): Popescu criticizes the team's handling of the block size debate and argues that they lack a deep understanding of the underlying economics and game theory of Bitcoin.

* [NoSuchLabs log from March 15, 2016](http://log.nosuchlabs.com//?date=15-Mar-2016#1333339): Popescu argues that the team's actions are undermining the very principles of Bitcoin.

* [Bitcoin-Assets log from February 1, 2016](http://log.bitcoin-assets.com//?date=01-Feb-2016#509011): Popescu argues that the block size limit is a major obstacle to Bitcoin's scalability and that a hard fork is necessary to increase the block size.

* [Trilema log from August 2, 2017](http://log.trilema.com//?date=02-Aug-2017#1759305): Popescu criticizes the implementation of SegWit and argues that it was pushed through without proper testing, debate, or consideration of its long-term consequences.

* [NoSuchLabs log from May 22, 2017](http://log.nosuchlabs.com//?date=22-May-2017#1544444): Popescu argues that the "Core" narrative is designed to confuse and mislead the public about the true nature of the Bitcoin protocol.

* [Bitcoin-Assets log from January 15, 2018](http://log.bitcoin-assets.com//?date=15-Jan-2018#630111): Popescu argues that some members of the BTC dev team have conflicts of interest that undermine the integrity of the Bitcoin protocol.

* [Trilema log from February 20, 2019](http://log.trilema.com//?date=20-Feb-2019#2211144): Popescu argues that the BTC dev team lacks a clear vision for the future of Bitcoin, leading to stagnation and a lack of innovation.

Please note that these logs are subject to change, and it's always a good idea to verify the information through multiple sources.

Also, keep in mind that these criticisms are subjective and may not be shared by everyone in the Bitcoin community. The views expressed in these logs are those of Mircea Popescu and other participants, and may not reflect the opinions of others.