'Bitcoin Cash may be hard forked in November. Two groups of developers can't agree on its features, releasing their own clients, Bitcoin ABC and Bitcoin SV, incompatible with previous software.' Two coins, two original Satoshi visions. Which one is 'truest'? Will both of them qualify as the vision?
Actually, the more you think about it, the funnier it becomes. To understand the irony behind this, we should look at Bitcoin history.
Bitcoin network was launched by Satoshi Nakamoto in '09, almost ten years ago! Only a few people took part in its development — Gavin Andresen and Jeff Garzik. Later the team grew up to hundreds of developers all over the world, but they managed to keep the overall consensus on most things — even the implementation of SegWit, that caused many debates. But at least it was one and only Bitcoin.
There's another story with Bitcoin Cash. It was launched in August '17, one year ago, and it still seems clueless about its development direction. Right after its launch a few tweaks were done to the original code: the size of a block was changed to 8 Mb (which is literally one line of code), SegWit was removed, and the consensus algorithm was changed to be able to adjust mining difficulty every minute. After that there was practically no development: a few changes here and there, a new expansion of a block to 32 Mb (again, one line!), and a new change of mining algorithms. Still, somehow BCH supporters believed it was far superior to BTC. Nobody cared that it was created by people who didn't write even a line of code for Bitcoin Core before, and that the whole scheme looked like one big money grab. Just look at it:
- You fork Bitcoin, creating your own version;
- You remove SegWit, that patched the bug, allowing your ASICs to mine Bitcoins 30% more efficiently than all other ASICs by other vendors;
- You advocate your Bitcoin like a 'true Bitcoin';
- You pump it like a devil. You end up with most of supply in your wallets;
- Everybody suddenly believes you, sell their BTC, and buy your BCH (didn't happen?);
- Profit (didn't happen?);
In reality, as we see it now, Bitmain might spend many millions to pump the price, as they have more than a million BCH, more than was mined since August '17, and now they can't even sell these coins without crashing the price. The market has no liquidity for it. The commercial use of BCH in also very low: even DOGE has more daily transactions. And now, in addition, its community can't even agree upon the direction of development, making a new hard fork practically inevitable! So instead of one worthless coin we'll see two worthless coins, one with 128 Mb sized block (seriously, BCH has less transactions that BTC with 1 Mb blocks, does anyone use all that space...) and another one with atomic swaps, both of them having a blessing of Satoshi’s true vision (or half of it?).
Bitcoin Cash has one problem…
… and it’s not its technology. It’s the awful marketing. BCH is a toxic coin, with a toxic community, promoting it by bashing other coins and building its reputation upon achievements of other community (we’re talking about Roger Ver’s shenanigans with bitcoin.com and its statements that BTC isn’t the true Bitcoin). Bitcoin achieved its success due to the support of its large community, it has nothing to do with Bitcoin Cash. The crypto space becomes more and more competitive and nobody can maintain its popularity forever by using other brand’s achievements. Maybe it’s time for BCH community to forget its 'true Bitcoin' agenda, and settle its inner conflicts? Otherwise, it may repeat the fate of Bitcoin Gold.
All the articles are based on personal opinions of their authors. Finrazor.com neither supports nor opposes any project or strategy. The authors may invest their own funds, and any piece of information shouldn't be considered as investment recommendations. Before taking decisions, users must consider all relevant risk factors including their own personal financial situation.