If my memory serves me right it's around 7 transactions per second.

The current solution that's gained the most traction is through the Lightning Network[1]. Transacting through LN should be a bit less secure and less decentralized, but it shouldn't be an issue because LN transactions should mostly be used for your daily sort of "coffee" transactions because it's far far faster and cheaper to transact with. Bigger and more expensive transactions should stick to the base layer.

---

[1] https://lightning.network/

Bitcoin is now more like "investment tool" AKA digital gold rather than digital money that is ment to replace fiats. So the fact that bitcoin is slow would not threaten him in any way. Bitcoin will never be as fast as visa. Is it bad? There is a scalable solution to it. You can wrap bitcoins from your hot wallet to other, more scalable, less secured/ less decentralized chains - f.e. BSC and use wrapped bitcoin. I think that thats what future of bitcoin will looks like. Majority of bitcoin-related traffic will take place outside of bitcoin chain.

You are referring to the scalability problem associated with Bitcoin. Compared to other cryptocurrencies already in the market, we know that Bitcoin is not really the best but since this is the most known and the most trusted of them all it seems to me that its scalability is not a big factor for its continuing viability. Anyway, most holders and enthusiasts understand that Bitcoin is more of a store of value than a currency. Of course, its scalability problem can be a limiting factor and that is why there are now many possible upgrades on the works, and I am particularly looking at Lightning Network as a possible solution.

LN fees will go to whoever runs an LN node, not to just centralized parties. It is similar to all the PoS or federated solutions proposed by alternate chains but with the final settlement of Bitcoin chain.

If you are not just a brainless shill then you would know that those are not EASY solutions. It is about choosing the most obvious, easy way out till your chain actually starts being used and then you hit the bottleneck due to the inherent trilemma of block-chains. It does not make any coin better or worse to adopt such solutions. With a faster block-speed and higher size you just increase the storage and throughput requirements. These can surely be optimized but that is a fork on the road, we haven't reached yet.

Due to extremely limited block size between 1-4Mb most of the times the transactions are possible : 7 per second now this is something that is definitely a very big problem as you do know already but at the same time

Let me quote the solutions that have been proposed:



Now honestly this is something that just has been proposed and not implemented , we have seen forks every year and therefore there are alternatives available but at the same time it is indeed important for bitcoins to have slower transactions , it makes the whole network more secure as a whole. That is like the whole different topic. But if we get further into it the reason it is so important to address is:



Now what we can see here is more and more people are waiting everyday on that, now we can either :
1. Make the lightning network more efficient
2. Increase in the block size

Both of them comes with their own security problems and issues therefore this is again an in-depth analysis of why it's low in the first place.

Source : Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_scalability_problem

That has been how it is for years and you’re not the first person to bring this issue up, so many people has always been talking about it and they keep saying it repeatedly. Transaction has always been the problem with Bitcoin and the devs have not been doing anything about it.

We have seen Lightening Network introduced , but no one even makes use of that, you will hardly see any of the wallets integrating that feature. All the top wallets that I have been making use of, none of them has that lightening network feature, so I always have to go with the normal transaction. And I believe the reason why they haven’t allowed lightening network on their platforms is because it’s still in development stages.

The problem of scalability is very real and cannot simply be ignored. However, as others pointed out, it's not ignored and some solutions are offered to reduce the fees and make it easier for Blockchain to deal transactions more efficiently (or have fewer transactions). Apart from the solutions that were already mentioned, there are less obvious things which I believe could nevertheless be effective to combat high fees. One of them is allowing zero-confirmation transactions for small sums of money (and these transactions can be sent with very low fees because of no urgency of the confirmation), and another is to use altcoins along with Bitcoin for transactions (if we're talking about them becoming means of payment), so that there's a smaller load on Bitcoin Blockchain.

FTFY