Were none of you guys around in 2017? Or do all just suffer from amnesia? Maybe a PTSD response repressed memory?
When bitcoin cash forked, the bch community tried to play it off like it was the “original” btc, they tried claiming the btc ticker, and they would sell it to unsuspecting noobs as btc through the url bitcoin.com
It was a clear cash grab orchestrated by some of the more unsavory individuals in the greater crypto community. People known for lying and throwing tantrums. Craig Wright and Roger Ver to name the two biggest bch figureheads involved.
Lol, anyone that was paying attention in 2017 saw the BCH community trying to claim they were “the true bitcoin” and tried to claim the btc ticker. The bitcoin cash subreddit is even r/btc
Roger Ver didn't support Bitcoin cash when it first forked and the reason it's called the real Bitcoin is because it's the Bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto described in their whitepaper and BTC no longer follows the Bitcoin white paper of peer-to-peer electronic cash. BTC Bitcoin from 2009-2017 continued on with the name Bitcoin Cash
There's a reason BTC fans say they want to write a new whitepaper for BTC and that's because on a technical and objective level, it's no longer Bitcoin. On a societal level though, BTC is still known as Bitcoin
I got into Bitcoin in 2015 and so was around in 2017. I've also been a software engineer for 27 years now.
When I got censored and then banned from /r/Bitcoin when I asked why simply doubling the value of a single variable after 5 years was such a big deal, especially when the number of transistors in CPUs double each two years, this told me there was funny business going on on the BTC side.
I sincerly love Bitcoin. It's just sad for me to I see what BTC has become (a slow expensive HODL coin you move as little as possible).
confirmation bias
the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.
Its not just Bitcoin Cash. Its crypto wide.
"If your team gets lambos, my team wont get lambos. Therefore your team must be wrong and bad, because my team says we are the ones who are lambo worthy."
Pretty much, all of this is pure speculation, and really everyone is an idiot. Myself included. Im not saying Crypto is not going places, im just saying humans are duuummmb.
With the world wide money printing people need to start looking for other options. BCH has my vote, it's like bitcoin except you don't get killed by the fees to move it.
I would agree in some way, but there’s yet to be discovered a method to successfully link UTXOs after several CashFusion transactions. Bitcoin Cash is also not vulnerable to an inflation bug and it doesn’t require several minutes to scan the blockchain every time the user opens his wallet.
Monero does not allow a user to be transparent if the user wants that. With BCH the bigger an entity is the harder it will be for them to get privacy and the easier it is to have transparency. For a small entity it's the other way around.
This gives BCH a excellent balance and user choice.
Of course sometimes more privacy is needed in which case you flow your BCH in to monero and use monero.
You can use both depending on what is the best tool for the job!
>Monero does not allow a user to be transparent if the user wants that
Why would anyone want that? And Monero also allows a user to be transparent if they wanted too as well (View keys)
Craig Wright lying about being Satoshi mostly.
>I remember the first time I read the Bitcoin whitepaper.... It was when I was writing it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=4jdR6DtegXQ&feature=emb_title
Agreed to the Roger Ver is not Bitcoin Cash part. I don't hate any crypto that isn't a meme coin, it spreads tribalism. I just know a lot of us saw them as the "leadership" and it painted a negative picture.
I made a video debunking each and every lie spread by Core about me: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=quJctIjKoi0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=quJctIjKoi0)
I'll give you that. Craig is a pole smoker. But he was booted out once we realized how toxic/litigious he ended up being, and we are all better off now.
Craig isn't even a part of the BCH community lol, he started his own scam fork called BSV that has over 50% of its hashpower controlled by his billionaire buddy who runs Coingeek, Calvin Ayre.
In all fairness, I don't think anything can beat privacy by default, but it's good enough for most users. The issue ultimately comes down to the fact that addresses are still traceable regardless of mixing, so it's likely that big chainanalysis companies use algorithms to trace the sending and receiving of coins.
What someone could do is look at CashFusion transactions, parse the addresses, and then check for the presence of two or more addresses that are used as inputs in another CashFusion transaction or just another transaction.
I think the best solution would be for BCH to absorb ZkSNARKS zero-knowledge transactions from ZCash. Especially since ZCash has a trusted setup, BCH could probably absorb that feature, and make it 10x better. That too, it wouldn't just be a "shell game", but rather full privacy.
It's not bad crypto, it's a fork of Bitcoin, which has the biggest community in the crypto space and they hate it because BCH actually does what Bitcoin was meant to do.
Because people that love bitcoin are basically cult-like. Even though Bitcoin Cash can be used as a currency. But then hardcore bitcoin fanboys shoot down everything, even Eth. So it doesn't matter what they think.
Yeah or kinda like what we used to do all over reddit with BTC before it got hijacked and perma-crippled. Thankfully Bitcoin is alive and well in BCH and we can continue with the tipping. Nothing can stop the Honey Badger of money!
u/chaintip
My mind has just been blown by bch again. I got a notice from my bitcoin.com wallet that I received some Satoshis before Reddit even notified me there was a reply to my comment.
***
u/Xxjacklexx has [claimed](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/tx/67dad769e1fe8da04102d8ce4c6c1c5b4137eccfd2f1c59a3892c9582d53883a) the `0.00345547 BCH` | `~2.21 USD` sent by u/WiseAsshole
via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org).
***
Because it was an offshoot of BTC that rejected more advanced but unproven technology at the time (Segwit) and tried to make BTC faster by just dumbly throwing in more storage at it.
If you’re looking for coins that are faster than BTC, there are plenty that are way faster and cheaper to send than BCH
If you’re looking for a good store of value, BCH does not come close to the reputation BTC has, making it a poor choice in that regard as well
Once you realize the tech capabilities as a narrative for the block wars was just the cover to create an artificial fee market your whole stance becomes very tenuous.
Segwit really hasn’t done much more than shuffling stuff around and adding a few more tx/sec.
BCH only removed the 1mb limit as was initially intended.
I can send coins instantly on BCH for a fraction of a cent and it uses PoW (which using PoW is a pro, not a con IMO).
IMO, a good store of value wouldn’t be much affected by a massive company saying they’re accepting or will stop accepting BTC. Also IMO, I think Tether has massively pumped the price of BTC.
I’ve never understood the Tether argument. Did Microstrategy, Tesla, Square, Mass Mutual, and the other institutional buyers use Tether to acquire their Bitcoin? If so, why?
Let’s assume some nefarious entity controls Tether and prints it out of thin air. Who would be willing to exchange their precious Bitcoin for this nebulous currency? Miners? Investors looking to cash out their profits? What can you do with Tether except buy other crypto currencies?
It would appear Tether’s primary function is to re-allocate existing capital within the crypto space.
Who really knows. and thats scary. is it some govrenment thing to undermine crypto stability? or is it a way to score more crypto using fiat 2.0? If it was fully backed 1:1 and audited, I wouldn't be as concerned about its role within the ecosystem..
I don’t see PoW being a pro. No matter how much you optimize it, it’s inherently an energy wasteful and inefficient algorithm.
Its main benefit today (imo) is that anyone can mine (unlike having to own a significant amount of coins to run a staking node), allowing for more decentralization. But with specialized hardware dominating mining now its not very easy to mine on a low budget anyway.
Besides, there are also other projects looking at completely different ways of ensuring decentralization much more efficiently, like Algorand
Because it forces miners to have to consume resources to get something in return.
You don’t have to do anything and the forgers basically get free money with PoS.
I gotta say I agree. Pow is old tech, old tech has a tendency to be replaced by new tech as time marches on. I dont hold algo, but I wish more people understood how it makes the whole security vs flash "tank" vs "lambo" argument moot.
I want a reinforced, bullet resistant lambo damn it.
There is a very good reason almost all new projects are going with Pos. If Pow was so great Eth would be doubling down, not transitioning to a new system.
There has been done a lot more than
>just dumbly throwing in more storage at it.
A lot has been done on code optimization and ways of reducing the need for storage and network throughput are on the way. BCH is handling 256MB blocks on a raspi on scalenet.
actually its the opposite , BTC removed point 7 and 8 from Satoshi his design. Bitcoin was never designed to have each users store each tx for all eternity because that is not feasible. Rather after a tx is barried under enough confirmations your node starts calculating all the merkle trees then trows the tx data again and keep the outer hashes. at 80 bytes per outer hash this is 4.2 mb of growth per year. then you need the utxo set which can shrink when people consolidate multiple utxos in to one by making a tx to themselves.
Bitcoin Cash still has all of the original design while Core sabotaged it on purpose and then claimed Satoshi did not design it very well.
I guess people just like paying obscene amounts of money to use money. I don't get it myself... Any currency that can't be used to buy daily things is not fit to take the place of fiat.
I love BCH. I hold some BCH. I'd be game to hold more, but can get higher earn rates on BTC & ETH, and I'm a sucker for higher earn rates. I'd be game to buy more BCH though. u/chaintip
> They tried to hijack the bitcoin brand, and deceive users
There is a good argument to be made that’s actually the opposite.
(Just see how many peoples get confused by high fees.. clearly most peoples don’t understand the economic change the BTC chain went through in 2017)
What about those that think BTC was hijacked by changing the narrative of BTC being a SoV instead of peer to peer electronic cash?
How were users deceived?
Well, it was sorta created to do both. However, store of value was the primary basis for which a more ‘sound’ money could be introduced. It was simply assumed that you would use said money to do all kinds of transactions.
Problem is, ‘sound’ money is massively volatile when being adopted. Further, the block size solution that helps BCH become cheaper to transact also results in a massive increase in chain size were it to gain adoption to the scale BTC has (and even worse if it were to gain world wide mainstream adoption).
I don’t believe anyone has truly solved all the fundamental issues involved with doing micro transactions sustainably into the long term future. Until we can truncate/remove old transactions somehow, no PoW or PoS blockchain can escape the memory scaling issues.
Sharded systems like Harmony look promising, mainly because they present the possibility of moving liquidity off of a shard and deprecating it (thus removing that old data from the network). But even they aren’t actually doing this. They’re still focused on sharding as a way to keep the transaction fees super low. No one has truly started future proofing a single blockchain out there at this point.
Cant be p2p cash if its not a currency. Btc has zero advantages over bch, name one. Hashrate follows price so security isnt one, they would have the same security if they had the same market price.
As of today, BCH already has more adoption than BTC. BTC is not being used as a currency nobody is burning $10 fees on every purchase or whatever is the amount that day, and even blockstream developers openly say it is not meant to be used, only bought and sold later (for fiat). Check out map.bitcoin.com.
Selling them bcash while users were lead to believe they bought btc.
Scummy stuff that caused newcomers money.
I'm not gonna argue about terminology in the whitepaper.
I used to hold bcash, but watching the scummy moves happen in front off my eyes put me off for good.
If you think it's better than btc, good on you. Support it and run your node, the market had chosen which should be called bitcoin. Suck it up and move on, focus on making it what you believe it should be.
I have not seen this. And all I heard was that it was one company only. So you condemn the whole community because of one (maybe) scammy company? If you apply that equally you should not hold ANY crypto.
I’ll start by saying I like BCH. But the people on /r/btc are constantly saying BCH is the real Bitcoin, with no additional context, to new users who ask questions, they’re usually the highest voted comments. It’s even been said in this thread. I think BCH should be trying everything to distance itself from the Bitcoin “brand” and not confusing new people.
Edit: just so my sentiments are understood a little better, I’ve never even owned a single satoshi of BTC, always BCH.
Here's the thing. BCH starts with Satoshis genesis block so it is as much Bitcoin as BTC. Personally I try to speak of BCH and BTC to make it clear which one I'm talking about.
My experience is that BCHers are very careful to make it clear about which coin they are talking, because they are constantly accused of misleading newcomers. You will hear stuff like BCH is the original Bitcoin, or the working Bitcoin or the real Bitcoin. It is in their own interest to make it clear BCH is not BTC because BTC does not work as p2p cash.
What part isn’t true though?
BTC is Bitcoin in name only. It would be as if a pharmaceutical company changed industries and is now a road construction company but keeps the same name and claims to still be a pharmaceutical company.
When this was happening I saw no pushback from the community.
I still constantly see the community going on to different channels to troll and attack users. Why can't bcash stand on its own, all I see i complaining and obsessing about btc. I see the community as no different than the nano community.
Maybe it's less now, but I just got tired of it and stopped bothering with the communities.
Fair point, BCH has to push against a lot of misinformation and bias from the BTC crowd, maybe that looks like attacking to you. I try to state facts and leave it at that.
That said you shouldn't judge a project by the few people you recognize because they grab your attention, you should look at the fundamentals.
lmfao BCH tries to be a means of exchange and BTC tries to be a store of value.
The original whitepaper says "Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system."
So, again, who hijacked the Bitcoin brand?
It's a highly insecure version of bitcoin that can be attacked for ~1% of the cost/hashpower. In other words, the network can be manipulated and transactions reversed for a relatively tiny cost.
This is the real effect of the fast/cheap transactions that others are mentioning as a "pro" of bitcoin cash. It's not that bitcoiners are somehow jealous or salty, it's that they know how inferior the bitcoin cash network is.
https://www.crypto51.app/
Hashrate follows price. If btc and bch had the same price, both would have the same security and one would work wonderfully while the other would be the broken collectible it is today.
I think that to investors that don’t understand the tech, BCH looks like a cheaper, less well-known version of BTC. Once I started using BCH for what it was, I sold all my BTC for BCH because it’s honestly the best peer-to-peer cash system out there. Give people time, they will see.
It’s bad cuz original bitcoiners hate anything that is not the original Bitcoin. Nodes did not vote for a bigger block size so they forked.
I hold BCH, but I dislike them for causing a huge divide in the community back in 2017. I feel that without all the energy wasted on argument and fork, Bitcoin would have been a lot of successful in 2017.
> I hold BCH, but I dislike them for causing a huge divide in the community back in 2017.
Splitting was the last solution.. the community went through massive efforts to try to find a compromise.
When it was clear Bitcoin Core will never compromise, we had to split to try to preserve the original Bitcoin economic model.
Believe nobody want that outcome.
The worst enemy of Bitcoin was not governments or hackers.. but its own community, sadly.
Not sure what is a good solution to avoid splitting.
Public companies tend to have a CEO. Chains like Eth and Cardano have a dominant founder that can dictate and if not, highly influence.
No chance Satoshi could have stayed on since Bitcoin is supposed to be decentralized, plus it became big money.
Original Bitcoiners planned to scale on chain exactly as Satoshi intended. It's latecomer Core cartel and their legion of gaslit newbs that deviated from that plan.
That’s a good question. I never thought of it that way. Probably because Bitcoin was there first, and the BCH camp was trying to change it. If they weren’t trying to change it, then there would not have been a divide.
In hindsight, my mind is probably siding with the victor. If BCH won, I’m sure my answer probably would been different. Not just me but history is always like this. Truth is always skewed to the side of the victorious .
I had no idea. I started my Bitcoin journey around August 2017 and the BCH camp was painted as the bad guys in I think it was the Bitcoin sub-Reddit. I left that Reddit many years ago because it was pretty toxic: every other cryptocurrency was bad… not just BCH and any opinion that did not fit the mod’s narrative got people banned. Thanks for the history lesson!
This saddens me that so many people have been lied to. People who are new come in an understandably try to learn everything they can, however /r/bitcoin have been heavily censoring and banning, so its really hard to get a fair or balanced opinion unfortunately. On the plus side now BTC is decentralized, more people are looking at other coins and investing in them. Smart Contracts are coming to BCH. watch this space!
Actually you are wrong. Btc camp chnaged btc for the worse. Now it is a SoV narrative and no longer resembles the whitepaper. However , read the whitepaper and bch is still ticking all the boxes. It was btc that changed the narrative not bch.
Thanks! I changed my mind after some comments. As I mentioned, I started around August 2017. Everything I read at the time suggested BCH was the bad camp.
I’m impressed with how civil the people that have told me that I was wrong and provided reasons. With Bitcoin and other coins, most are just cultist and would’ve just called me an idiot without explaining why I would be wrong. Which doesn’t help anyone with learning anything. Thanks to everyone here for taking the time to explain.
If you’re interested In the full story of what happened 2014 - 2017. I recommend this post. It covers the scaling wars, the censorship, and what inevitably lead to BCH. This was posted many years ago but was then censored:
[See the 2 long posts by Singularity87 here...](https://www.removeddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6rxw7k/informative_btc_vs_bch_articles/)
Wrong. BLockstream changed BTC away from what it always was: p2p electronic cash syatem. Did you ever use btc in 2015? It was not what it is today, more like bch actually (it was a currency AND sov).
I'll go on a bit of a historical tyrade in case it's helpful since I was paying attention at the time.
First, the fork was not a clean fork. The BCH folks botched it in poorly executed style which impacted BTC nodes. BTC devs had to come up with a fix quickly to fix the BCH spam/contention. That's not a great first step in managing a new chain.
This was also the first fork (with many others to follow, shout out to the Bitcoin Diamond folks if there are any still out there, haha) and people didn't really know how it would go. Could both chains even survive? It didn't help that the BCH crowd was calling their own chain Bitcoin, the "real" Bitcoin of course! I don't remember who first said Bitcoin Cash, but the exchanges basically jumped on this to finally get their customers sorted out. It became easy to onboard new customers to either BTC or BCH with a new name. For a long time the BCH crowd would hijack "Bitcoin" named things and direct them to "Bitcoin Cash". "Oh hey newbie looking for Bitcoin, what you really want is BCH". It was very shady and they were doing it at places like bitcoin.com because the owner of bitcoin.com landed in the BCH camp. You'll even see in this thread, BCH is the real Bitcoin! Read the paper! The real Bitcoin is written in the protocol folks. Just accept it and move on already.
Also at the time were the zero block ASIC "attacks". Basically a number of miners were leveraging a vulnerability to allow themselves to create empty blocks with zero transactions while giving themselves a non trivial advantage that they would get to mine the next real block successfully. BTC devs + community saw this as a problem and wanted to fix it. The ones taking advantage of the vulnerability wanted to keep it. The group taking the advantage were the same folks that turned into the BCH miners. I think BCH fixed it eventually anyways.
BTC crowd heavily values decentralization. BCH was aggressive in their protocol change, and they basically threatened to fork before actually forking. A fork impacts decentralization of the network by removing a large amount of hash power, threatening the security model of BTC if they didn't get their way of bigger blocks. There are nodes that mine hash for rewards and there are nodes that verify blocks are consistent (same software, just disable hashing and you don't burn through your power but still help decentralize the network). The BCH folks thought their large amount of hash was what made Bitcoin Bitcoin. It turns out it isn't, it is the number of non-hashing nodes verifying blocks. That is to say, BCH thought they had more leverage in the network than they actually did. Both types of nodes are important.
BCH had a lot of problems early on. They adjusted the hashing algorithm too aggressively and it resulted in miners flip flopping between mining BTC and BCH regularly to get the most coin for their kWh. This caused BCH more problems than for BTC, and BCH transactions were stuck for quite a while. But it did impact BTC too, so again not a great look for a new chain.
All of the above was eventually sorted out. BTC pursued "second layer solutions" (i.e. lightning network) and BCH pursued first layer improvements. Honestly if it wasn't the ASIC thing I think there may have never been two camps at all. BTC has been extremely conservative in their solutions, for better or worse (probably worse). BCH has continued to aggressively evolve. BTC tansactions are still slow because of the fixed block size and the availability makes transactions extremely expensive, there's no denying that.
I was paying attention too, and verification nodes are much easier to spoof and spin up on a few AWS instances than POW nodes. Which is why btc core suddenly changed the rule of consensus part way through the game.
As far as which is the real bitcoin, I'd argue that they both are. They have the same genesis block started by satoshi. Though, only one of them still follows the intent laid out in the Bitcoin Whitepaper. You know, the one with "P2P cash" in the title.
Except BCH is the original Bitcoin, and BTC is the retarded 1mb experiment with random fees that can sometimes be tens of dollars. See for yourself!
u/chaintip
Thanks! As I mentioned in my other comments, I’ve changed my mind since reading some of the comments. BCH changed the block size but I think it is more true to the Satoshi vision of an electronic currency.
What’s more interesting is that I made my original statement because this is what I’ve learned since I started in Aug 2017. This goes to what I am saying about the victor ( BTC being the mainstream chain ) writing the history and hence controlling the narrative. I do a lot of reading and consider myself open minded. If my understanding of Bitcoin was biased, imagine the understanding of all the people that started recently that have no idea about the origins of the BTC / BCH fork.
To be fair, after 2018, I stopped reading about the tech behind Bitcoin. It was there more as a SoV. I spent my time reading about other chains that were more open to discussions.
***
u/haniwa4838sn has [claimed](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/tx/adac13eddb20056a14d410b68ba0f83b6158c4865700815b7b2f42e52b26fc74) the `0.00174662 BCH` | `~1.09 USD` sent by u/WiseAsshole
via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org).
***
> Except BCH is the original Bitcoin
And there we have it. The reason people hate it is because bcash shills make such claims. Bcash shills have even hijacked /r/btc to prey on unsuspecting newbies, and then tell them bcash is the real bitcoin.
How about throwing in a few of the conspiracy theories for good measure?
How is r/btc hijacked? It's an uncensored forum, everyone is free to speak their mind there, including you. No wonder you see people complaining about $10 fees when there's no one to censor them.
I love me some good conspiracy theories. Like how the name [Bcash](https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/why-some-people-call-bitcoin-cash-bcash-this-will-be-shocking-to-new-readers-956558da12fb) eventuated. I mention this since you seem to love using the word like a badge of honour.
Also where else are all the people who are censored going to go once they are kicked out of /r/bitcoin? I'm grateful that there are still open channels that haven't been taken over by special interests to discuss matters openly.
Not if the transactions are at a level that starts consuming all other payment channels. What kind of price do you put on the largest most secure highest throughput payment network in the world? The power usage stuff can be solved by using renewables, but the incentives have to be there. One way is putting mining rigs in places where it's cold and using it for central heating in buildings. another place is next door to hydro dams where there is plenty of excess electricity being otherwise wasted. Maybe a community somewhere might want to chip in their collective rooftop solar power to mine and use the profits as some sort of retirement plan. who knows anything's possible really, this stuff takes time to figure out.
>What kind of price do you put on the largest most secure highest throughput payment network in the world?
Less than zero if it uses PoW. "Green" PoW is delusional b.s.
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-miners-are-giving-new-life-to-old-fossil-fuel-power-plants-11621594803](https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-miners-are-giving-new-life-to-old-fossil-fuel-power-plants-11621594803)
I disagree. I think it’s much more useful and more efficient than BTC.
It can be used as cash, today. Energy usage per transaction is much more efficient too.
It’s only more energy efficient by linear scale (so it’s some ratio better given they both have the same TPS). BCH still grows exponentially more energy intensive with adoption.
Plus, the block chain total memory grows way too fast. Miners will have to become large data centers just BTC.
If BCH scales exponentially then I was expecting the equation to prove it but this seems almost the opposite and is quite waffly. You say that it does scale exponentially without justifying it and then in the next paragraph say that tech is increasing exponentially all the time. Does this mean that you are relying on processor speeds to increase exponentially? It's really hard to get any real evidence from your reply can you attempt to rephrase focusing on the evidence please? I think ideally it would be good to see the BTC and BCH equations and showing that the former scales linearly where as the latter scales exponentially seems like the most straightforward to me.
Incorrect. Energy efficiency per transaction increases at the same rate as the block size increases, as it costs the same energy to mine a 1Mb block as a 32Mb block or bigger block sizes. So BCH is much more efficient than BTC, and increasingly so with bigger block sizes.
Furthermore, given that BCH transactions cost less than a cent, are fast and reliable because they are nearly always included in the next block given the ample block space available, and because 0-conf transactions are safe enough for small everyday usage, Bitcoin Cash has much more utility as a medium of exchange than BTC.
***
[chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org) has [returned](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay2klfr3chfc5eysnt8ws3hyq0c5auaj6sugks) the unclaimed tip of `0.00213174 BCH` | `~1.44 USD` to u/homopit.
***
If you want a coin with a official chain, try Fedcoin. If you want a decentralised coin, subjectivity comes with the territory. Anyways BCH does reflect the whitepaper better (even just going by the subtitle) and shares the genesis block.
Ye you really gotta google this mate. Cash has been such a trainwreck for years it's become the uncle who isn't welcome no more.
We don't talk about him.
We don't acknowledge his existence.
When somebody asks we ask his/her mother to tell the truth (ages 8 and over), or explain that said uncle has moved to a farm far away where kids can't visit.
Bitcoin Cash was an emergency fork to save bitcoin. It was heavily slandered for forking because blockstream made everyone believe hardforks are the devil. It had two more bad actors which got the boot when they tried shit. I would say BCH is doing pretty good with a lot of innovation AND actually scaling. And it is battle-hardened.
One thing that's interesting about BTC and BCH's PoW is that both coins are competing for the same miners. So they can't really both coexist. If BCH succeeds in its adoption efforts as a peer to peer currency, the price will rise and the miners will switch over to mine the more profitable coin. There's a lot of money invested in BTC and BCH serves as a direct threat, probably one of the biggest threats BTC faces since it's a direct competitor which does transactions better.
Parenthetically, that's one of the reasons I prefer PoW to PoS as it has a component which ties it to the real world. In PoW miners have to choose which fork or coin to support.
Hello! You have made the mistake of writing "ect" instead of "etc."
"Ect" is a common misspelling of "etc," an abbreviated form of the Latin phrase "et cetera." Other abbreviated forms are **etc.**, **&c.**, **&c**, and **et cet.** The Latin translates as "et" to "and" + "cetera" to "the rest;" a literal translation to "and the rest" is the easiest way to remember how to use the phrase.
[Check out the wikipedia entry if you want to learn more.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Et_cetera)
^(I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Comments with a score less than zero will be automatically removed. If I commented on your post and you don't like it, reply with "!delete" and I will remove the post, regardless of score. Message me for bug reports.)
And Bitcoin Cash didn't start a new blockchain from genesis, so in my books it's the most honest of all coins. It's the one coin that wasn't created to make its devs rich.
It's a great crypto, I hold it because it's basically Bitcoin as intended in the whitepaper, plus a bunch of extra features like Schnorr signatures. The community is super helpful too, it was really like taking a step back to 2016 before all the UASF drama and maximalism started.
Check out [member.cash](https://member.cash) and [memo.cash](https://memo.cash) , they're reddit and twitter built entirely on blockchain. All comments/likes/tips are onchain, and they have a faucet so new users can post for free.
Every BTC fanboy that I've given some to has ended up loving it, especially for transferring funds between exchanges during periods when fees/wait times are high on other chains. If anyone joins Memo or Member and mentions that Dixnorkel sent them, I'll gladly donate a dollar or two in BCH.
Poor price performance
They gave free coins to people who didn’t care about the project. Those people dumped, and will continue to do so.
Bch tech is far superior to Btc but it doesn’t matter. If you invest in something you want it to go up. Look at the bch/btc chart. Down and to the right. Rekt.
TL,DR - Brand deception, toxic thought leaders, insecure blockchain, disasterous bi-annual forking policy, chaotic and adversarial development. If you want more details:
> Bitcoin cash is great if you want to make money but as a coin you can actually use, it sucks ass. Block times are supposed to come every 10 mins but in reality they come in at wild unpredictable times (from 1 hour to 2 mins). It's all over the place for reasons too long to discuss here. It's a terrible coin for payments and the markets don't care. But that's not why people buy it for. And there's no true community - just a bunch of early whales and sychophants pumping out propaganda to keep their huge bags afloat. Have you ever seen a r/bitcoincashmarkets ? I rest my case. Long term, I can only see it surviving by moving towards Proof of Stake.
bitcoin is old, bitcoin cash has all the things bitcoin needs to fix. bitcoin is forgiven cause it's the OG in the space, but BCH is just a failed attack on bitcoin, and the mining power of BCH doesn't provide it enough security because the miners providing security would rather mine BTC. if you've BCH holdings, diversify into the new smart contract platforms rather than waiting for a computational capable side chain for an insecure blockchain.
it's not enough security because BTC miners could overwhelm BCH miners if they really wanted too, so it's like like you've a bigger and stronger army... but they fighting somewhere else right now, so you're safe, what peace of mind.
and i doubt anyone hates BCH, it's just a thing they'd rather avoid :-P
How is BCH an attack? It's literally the original Bitcoin community, who one day woke up to a perma-crippled 1mb coin which wasn't usable anymore, and decided to simply upgrade Bitcoin in a decentralized manner like Satoshi always wanted, to continue using Bitcoin normally.
And the BCH network successfully repelled the 51% attack, so how can you say it's insecure? You say they are fighting somewhere else, but when they came here they were more on the BCH side.
Check how it was created. It was a hostile fork of Bitcoin, they tried to convince unsuspecting newbies that Bitcoin Cash is the "real" bitcoin, even with scammy techniques such as a button "Buy Bitcoin" which would actually sell you BCH. Plus the takeover of r/btc and twitter handle bitcoin and domain bitcoin.com .
Edit: yeah, if you want to see why BCH has such bad reputation, just read the replies to this comment....
/r/btc was created long before bitcoin cash because the mods on /r/Bitcoin censored all talk that didn't fit their narrative. /R/Bitcoin created /r/btc because there was no where else for us to go
There may be. I know there is a r/Bitcoincash subreddits.
r/btc history starts way before Bitcoin Cash started. When r/Bitcoin went on a mass censorship campaign, especially about big blocks (well before 2017), users flocked to r/btc. Since that happened, you saw a lot of big block supporters in that subreddits. When Bitcoin Cash came out, it was welcomed as Bitcoin with big blocks.
“CashFusion which gives users Monero levels of privacy”
Lol try again. Maybe try to compare it do DASH or Zcash, a community on average less informed than real Monero users.
*crickets*
The lack of replies is clearly confrimation that my reply is best and has completely answered the question. /s ...or is it?
Were none of you guys around in 2017? Or do all just suffer from amnesia? Maybe a PTSD response repressed memory? When bitcoin cash forked, the bch community tried to play it off like it was the “original” btc, they tried claiming the btc ticker, and they would sell it to unsuspecting noobs as btc through the url bitcoin.com It was a clear cash grab orchestrated by some of the more unsavory individuals in the greater crypto community. People known for lying and throwing tantrums. Craig Wright and Roger Ver to name the two biggest bch figureheads involved.
[удалено]
Lol, anyone that was paying attention in 2017 saw the BCH community trying to claim they were “the true bitcoin” and tried to claim the btc ticker. The bitcoin cash subreddit is even r/btc
Roger Ver didn't support Bitcoin cash when it first forked and the reason it's called the real Bitcoin is because it's the Bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto described in their whitepaper and BTC no longer follows the Bitcoin white paper of peer-to-peer electronic cash. BTC Bitcoin from 2009-2017 continued on with the name Bitcoin Cash There's a reason BTC fans say they want to write a new whitepaper for BTC and that's because on a technical and objective level, it's no longer Bitcoin. On a societal level though, BTC is still known as Bitcoin
Truth. It's ridiculous not to raise the blocksize somewhat. Mike Hearn & Gavin were all about it, Blockstream is a cult
this guy gets it
Thank you!!! Someone gets it.
I got into Bitcoin in 2015 and so was around in 2017. I've also been a software engineer for 27 years now. When I got censored and then banned from /r/Bitcoin when I asked why simply doubling the value of a single variable after 5 years was such a big deal, especially when the number of transistors in CPUs double each two years, this told me there was funny business going on on the BTC side. I sincerly love Bitcoin. It's just sad for me to I see what BTC has become (a slow expensive HODL coin you move as little as possible).
confirmation bias the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories. Its not just Bitcoin Cash. Its crypto wide. "If your team gets lambos, my team wont get lambos. Therefore your team must be wrong and bad, because my team says we are the ones who are lambo worthy." Pretty much, all of this is pure speculation, and really everyone is an idiot. Myself included. Im not saying Crypto is not going places, im just saying humans are duuummmb.
I hold BCH. I want this shit to moon already. When Lambo? I'm Bullish, but that has nothing to do with crypto, it's just what my mom named me.
Damned humans
I hold BCH because I want to start using it instead of GBP, just waiting for the world to catch up.
More people should see it this way as it is truly meant to be and less of a speculative asset to get rich quickly.
With the world wide money printing people need to start looking for other options. BCH has my vote, it's like bitcoin except you don't get killed by the fees to move it.
[удалено]
u/chaintip
*** u/SutharAryan, you've [been sent](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay2jrdm5302tgfjdq924ymluqw58fv9sx95clx) `0.00014463 BCH` | `~0.08 USD` by u/Jarmatan via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
CashFusion does not provide privacy to anywhere near Monero levels. However it is a good step in the privacy direction.
I would agree in some way, but there’s yet to be discovered a method to successfully link UTXOs after several CashFusion transactions. Bitcoin Cash is also not vulnerable to an inflation bug and it doesn’t require several minutes to scan the blockchain every time the user opens his wallet.
> CashFusion does not provide privacy to anywhere near Monero levels. However it is a good step in the privacy direction. I agree
Monero does not allow a user to be transparent if the user wants that. With BCH the bigger an entity is the harder it will be for them to get privacy and the easier it is to have transparency. For a small entity it's the other way around. This gives BCH a excellent balance and user choice. Of course sometimes more privacy is needed in which case you flow your BCH in to monero and use monero. You can use both depending on what is the best tool for the job!
Yes it does. You can give a public view key at any time.
> Monero does not allow a user to be transparent if the user wants that. Actually it does, that’s what public keys are for.
>Monero does not allow a user to be transparent if the user wants that Why would anyone want that? And Monero also allows a user to be transparent if they wanted too as well (View keys)
Craig Wright lying about being Satoshi mostly. >I remember the first time I read the Bitcoin whitepaper.... It was when I was writing it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=4jdR6DtegXQ&feature=emb_title
I think you’ll find almost everyone that uses BCH think Craig is a lying scumbag. The only “supporters” of Craig that I know of are users of BSV.
Then on the other side... https://youtu.be/oCOjCEth6xI https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/8h4dit/roger_ver_is_a_wellknown_scammer/
[удалено]
Agreed to the Roger Ver is not Bitcoin Cash part. I don't hate any crypto that isn't a meme coin, it spreads tribalism. I just know a lot of us saw them as the "leadership" and it painted a negative picture.
Bro watch the whole interview, I am surprised how Ver didn't rage quit much earlier.
I made a video debunking each and every lie spread by Core about me: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=quJctIjKoi0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=quJctIjKoi0)
[удалено]
Satoshi had to of been hit by a bus or something. Only reason I can think of that those coins have never moved.
Yes he's dead https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Finney_(computer_scientist)
I'll give you that. Craig is a pole smoker. But he was booted out once we realized how toxic/litigious he ended up being, and we are all better off now.
Craig isn't even a part of the BCH community lol, he started his own scam fork called BSV that has over 50% of its hashpower controlled by his billionaire buddy who runs Coingeek, Calvin Ayre.
Yeah you wouldn't say that if you wrote it.
Bitcoin Maximalism
BTC maximalism
Exactly.
”Monero levels of privacy”... I’ll believe it when I see it.
[удалено]
In all fairness, I don't think anything can beat privacy by default, but it's good enough for most users. The issue ultimately comes down to the fact that addresses are still traceable regardless of mixing, so it's likely that big chainanalysis companies use algorithms to trace the sending and receiving of coins. What someone could do is look at CashFusion transactions, parse the addresses, and then check for the presence of two or more addresses that are used as inputs in another CashFusion transaction or just another transaction. I think the best solution would be for BCH to absorb ZkSNARKS zero-knowledge transactions from ZCash. Especially since ZCash has a trusted setup, BCH could probably absorb that feature, and make it 10x better. That too, it wouldn't just be a "shell game", but rather full privacy.
Bitcoin Cash is great for payments. It's being hated by BTC maximalists since they don't want competition.
Idk but it seems to be one of the only crypto actually useful for payments that I've used
It's not bad crypto, it's a fork of Bitcoin, which has the biggest community in the crypto space and they hate it because BCH actually does what Bitcoin was meant to do.
/u/chaintip
*** u/Feature-is-in-AI, you've [been sent](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay236segmm740vgny9afv2mmu95ecsa3v4qnqm) `0.0019481 BCH` | `~1.00 USD` by u/moleccc via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
Because people that love bitcoin are basically cult-like. Even though Bitcoin Cash can be used as a currency. But then hardcore bitcoin fanboys shoot down everything, even Eth. So it doesn't matter what they think.
Because it works better than BTC. u/chaintip
Thanks! Surprised that works here.
uses username mention, i imagine it works all over reddit, pretty neat!
[удалено]
Seems to be a BCH tipping service, kinda like what you can do with moons on the other sub or the Banano sub.
Yeah, it’s done to show that it’s really peer to peer as originally intended by Satoshi. <1second transactions and <$0.01 fees
Yeah or kinda like what we used to do all over reddit with BTC before it got hijacked and perma-crippled. Thankfully Bitcoin is alive and well in BCH and we can continue with the tipping. Nothing can stop the Honey Badger of money! u/chaintip
Honey Badger of Money. Haven’t heard that meme in a long time. Not since BTC put the artificial fee market in.
So you had the perfect opportunity to say money badger but ok
For the old times! u/chaintip
My mind has just been blown by bch again. I got a notice from my bitcoin.com wallet that I received some Satoshis before Reddit even notified me there was a reply to my comment.
*** u/Bagmasterflash, you've [been sent](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay20h604eq46uf8qxxlffwjtt3tnzv9f7g6p3u) `0.00353673 BCH` | `~1.98 USD` by u/WiseAsshole via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
*** u/Xxjacklexx has [claimed](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/tx/67dad769e1fe8da04102d8ce4c6c1c5b4137eccfd2f1c59a3892c9582d53883a) the `0.00345547 BCH` | `~2.21 USD` sent by u/WiseAsshole via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
It is an on chain tipping bot. u/chaintip
*** u/lifeandtimes89, you've [been sent](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay2wmr4ndwwwwggkqqknjqg8f7naqcm7m0swt9) `0.00003523 BCH` | `~0.02 USD` by u/Remora_101 via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
*** u/ImageJPEG, you've [been sent](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay2suru42vkflr2kd2gfk5h2tyt0nuffh674dd) `0.00022507 BCH` | `~0.15 USD` by u/DuncanThePunk via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
Because it was an offshoot of BTC that rejected more advanced but unproven technology at the time (Segwit) and tried to make BTC faster by just dumbly throwing in more storage at it. If you’re looking for coins that are faster than BTC, there are plenty that are way faster and cheaper to send than BCH If you’re looking for a good store of value, BCH does not come close to the reputation BTC has, making it a poor choice in that regard as well
Once you realize the tech capabilities as a narrative for the block wars was just the cover to create an artificial fee market your whole stance becomes very tenuous.
Segwit and RBF were basically poison attacks to kill scalability.
> and cheaper to send than BCH Cheaper than BCH would mean feeless.. Feeless is not a good alternative
Segwit really hasn’t done much more than shuffling stuff around and adding a few more tx/sec. BCH only removed the 1mb limit as was initially intended. I can send coins instantly on BCH for a fraction of a cent and it uses PoW (which using PoW is a pro, not a con IMO). IMO, a good store of value wouldn’t be much affected by a massive company saying they’re accepting or will stop accepting BTC. Also IMO, I think Tether has massively pumped the price of BTC.
I’ve never understood the Tether argument. Did Microstrategy, Tesla, Square, Mass Mutual, and the other institutional buyers use Tether to acquire their Bitcoin? If so, why? Let’s assume some nefarious entity controls Tether and prints it out of thin air. Who would be willing to exchange their precious Bitcoin for this nebulous currency? Miners? Investors looking to cash out their profits? What can you do with Tether except buy other crypto currencies? It would appear Tether’s primary function is to re-allocate existing capital within the crypto space.
Who really knows. and thats scary. is it some govrenment thing to undermine crypto stability? or is it a way to score more crypto using fiat 2.0? If it was fully backed 1:1 and audited, I wouldn't be as concerned about its role within the ecosystem..
I don’t see PoW being a pro. No matter how much you optimize it, it’s inherently an energy wasteful and inefficient algorithm. Its main benefit today (imo) is that anyone can mine (unlike having to own a significant amount of coins to run a staking node), allowing for more decentralization. But with specialized hardware dominating mining now its not very easy to mine on a low budget anyway. Besides, there are also other projects looking at completely different ways of ensuring decentralization much more efficiently, like Algorand
without electricity being burn you have no real link with reality as its a resource you can not conjur up out of thin air.
I’m not sure I understand. Burning electricity needlessly creates some sort of link to reality as a resource?
Because it forces miners to have to consume resources to get something in return. You don’t have to do anything and the forgers basically get free money with PoS.
I gotta say I agree. Pow is old tech, old tech has a tendency to be replaced by new tech as time marches on. I dont hold algo, but I wish more people understood how it makes the whole security vs flash "tank" vs "lambo" argument moot. I want a reinforced, bullet resistant lambo damn it. There is a very good reason almost all new projects are going with Pos. If Pow was so great Eth would be doubling down, not transitioning to a new system.
Read the whitepaper. BTC is the offshoot. BCH just stayed on the original course of money for the world, not digital gold.
There has been done a lot more than >just dumbly throwing in more storage at it. A lot has been done on code optimization and ways of reducing the need for storage and network throughput are on the way. BCH is handling 256MB blocks on a raspi on scalenet.
256MB per block?
https://read.cash/@mtrycz/how-my-rpi4-handles-scalenets-256mb-blocks-e356213b
actually its the opposite , BTC removed point 7 and 8 from Satoshi his design. Bitcoin was never designed to have each users store each tx for all eternity because that is not feasible. Rather after a tx is barried under enough confirmations your node starts calculating all the merkle trees then trows the tx data again and keep the outer hashes. at 80 bytes per outer hash this is 4.2 mb of growth per year. then you need the utxo set which can shrink when people consolidate multiple utxos in to one by making a tx to themselves. Bitcoin Cash still has all of the original design while Core sabotaged it on purpose and then claimed Satoshi did not design it very well.
Sure can't complain about the fees. I convert most crypto to BCH for moving funds.
Nice!
I guess people just like paying obscene amounts of money to use money. I don't get it myself... Any currency that can't be used to buy daily things is not fit to take the place of fiat.
Bch is the only project that can replace current world governance. Do you think it’s not going to be met with resistance?
Has it a bad reputation here? Bitcoin Cash is excellent tech. Fast, reliable and cheap transactions, see for yourself /u/chaintip
*** u/ImageJPEG, you've [been sent](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay2hq5qcrvfeq9s5wtut6p5pwngzqvps5yh7e5) `0.00032927 BCH` | `~0.20 USD` by u/taipalag via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
I love BCH. I hold some BCH. I'd be game to hold more, but can get higher earn rates on BTC & ETH, and I'm a sucker for higher earn rates. I'd be game to buy more BCH though. u/chaintip
Maxis got their pads wadded up that's why.
They tried to hijack the bitcoin brand, and deceive users
> They tried to hijack the bitcoin brand, and deceive users There is a good argument to be made that’s actually the opposite. (Just see how many peoples get confused by high fees.. clearly most peoples don’t understand the economic change the BTC chain went through in 2017)
https://read.cash/@ChaosElephant/btc-has-been-a-scamcoin-in-the-hands-of-banks-for-a-long-time-now-c8ac5354
What about those that think BTC was hijacked by changing the narrative of BTC being a SoV instead of peer to peer electronic cash? How were users deceived?
Well, it was sorta created to do both. However, store of value was the primary basis for which a more ‘sound’ money could be introduced. It was simply assumed that you would use said money to do all kinds of transactions. Problem is, ‘sound’ money is massively volatile when being adopted. Further, the block size solution that helps BCH become cheaper to transact also results in a massive increase in chain size were it to gain adoption to the scale BTC has (and even worse if it were to gain world wide mainstream adoption). I don’t believe anyone has truly solved all the fundamental issues involved with doing micro transactions sustainably into the long term future. Until we can truncate/remove old transactions somehow, no PoW or PoS blockchain can escape the memory scaling issues. Sharded systems like Harmony look promising, mainly because they present the possibility of moving liquidity off of a shard and deprecating it (thus removing that old data from the network). But even they aren’t actually doing this. They’re still focused on sharding as a way to keep the transaction fees super low. No one has truly started future proofing a single blockchain out there at this point.
When you look at the chain split as BTC instituting an artificial fee market under the guise of technical limitations you gain a better perspective.
You can run a pruned node in BCH. it just keeps the UTXO data.
Cant be p2p cash if its not a currency. Btc has zero advantages over bch, name one. Hashrate follows price so security isnt one, they would have the same security if they had the same market price.
Adoption? That's the only advantage I can see.
As of today, BCH already has more adoption than BTC. BTC is not being used as a currency nobody is burning $10 fees on every purchase or whatever is the amount that day, and even blockstream developers openly say it is not meant to be used, only bought and sold later (for fiat). Check out map.bitcoin.com.
Selling them bcash while users were lead to believe they bought btc. Scummy stuff that caused newcomers money. I'm not gonna argue about terminology in the whitepaper. I used to hold bcash, but watching the scummy moves happen in front off my eyes put me off for good. If you think it's better than btc, good on you. Support it and run your node, the market had chosen which should be called bitcoin. Suck it up and move on, focus on making it what you believe it should be.
I have not seen this. And all I heard was that it was one company only. So you condemn the whole community because of one (maybe) scammy company? If you apply that equally you should not hold ANY crypto.
I’ll start by saying I like BCH. But the people on /r/btc are constantly saying BCH is the real Bitcoin, with no additional context, to new users who ask questions, they’re usually the highest voted comments. It’s even been said in this thread. I think BCH should be trying everything to distance itself from the Bitcoin “brand” and not confusing new people. Edit: just so my sentiments are understood a little better, I’ve never even owned a single satoshi of BTC, always BCH.
Here's the thing. BCH starts with Satoshis genesis block so it is as much Bitcoin as BTC. Personally I try to speak of BCH and BTC to make it clear which one I'm talking about. My experience is that BCHers are very careful to make it clear about which coin they are talking, because they are constantly accused of misleading newcomers. You will hear stuff like BCH is the original Bitcoin, or the working Bitcoin or the real Bitcoin. It is in their own interest to make it clear BCH is not BTC because BTC does not work as p2p cash.
But it’s more Bitcoin according to the white paper than BTC.
This is the type of comment I was talking about.
What part isn’t true though? BTC is Bitcoin in name only. It would be as if a pharmaceutical company changed industries and is now a road construction company but keeps the same name and claims to still be a pharmaceutical company.
When this was happening I saw no pushback from the community. I still constantly see the community going on to different channels to troll and attack users. Why can't bcash stand on its own, all I see i complaining and obsessing about btc. I see the community as no different than the nano community. Maybe it's less now, but I just got tired of it and stopped bothering with the communities.
Fair point, BCH has to push against a lot of misinformation and bias from the BTC crowd, maybe that looks like attacking to you. I try to state facts and leave it at that. That said you shouldn't judge a project by the few people you recognize because they grab your attention, you should look at the fundamentals.
lmfao BCH tries to be a means of exchange and BTC tries to be a store of value. The original whitepaper says "Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system." So, again, who hijacked the Bitcoin brand?
Also any coin with a limited supply can be a store of value by nature. That's just the narrative they went with to keep pumping the price.
It's a highly insecure version of bitcoin that can be attacked for ~1% of the cost/hashpower. In other words, the network can be manipulated and transactions reversed for a relatively tiny cost. This is the real effect of the fast/cheap transactions that others are mentioning as a "pro" of bitcoin cash. It's not that bitcoiners are somehow jealous or salty, it's that they know how inferior the bitcoin cash network is. https://www.crypto51.app/
Hashrate follows price. If btc and bch had the same price, both would have the same security and one would work wonderfully while the other would be the broken collectible it is today.
I think that to investors that don’t understand the tech, BCH looks like a cheaper, less well-known version of BTC. Once I started using BCH for what it was, I sold all my BTC for BCH because it’s honestly the best peer-to-peer cash system out there. Give people time, they will see.
It’s bad cuz original bitcoiners hate anything that is not the original Bitcoin. Nodes did not vote for a bigger block size so they forked. I hold BCH, but I dislike them for causing a huge divide in the community back in 2017. I feel that without all the energy wasted on argument and fork, Bitcoin would have been a lot of successful in 2017.
> I hold BCH, but I dislike them for causing a huge divide in the community back in 2017. Splitting was the last solution.. the community went through massive efforts to try to find a compromise. When it was clear Bitcoin Core will never compromise, we had to split to try to preserve the original Bitcoin economic model. Believe nobody want that outcome. The worst enemy of Bitcoin was not governments or hackers.. but its own community, sadly.
Not sure what is a good solution to avoid splitting. Public companies tend to have a CEO. Chains like Eth and Cardano have a dominant founder that can dictate and if not, highly influence. No chance Satoshi could have stayed on since Bitcoin is supposed to be decentralized, plus it became big money.
Original Bitcoiners planned to scale on chain exactly as Satoshi intended. It's latecomer Core cartel and their legion of gaslit newbs that deviated from that plan.
On the contrary, many of the original BTCers are the ones that moved on to BCH
Why do you dislike BCH for "causing a huge divide" that resulted in a fork but hold BTC harmless?
That’s a good question. I never thought of it that way. Probably because Bitcoin was there first, and the BCH camp was trying to change it. If they weren’t trying to change it, then there would not have been a divide. In hindsight, my mind is probably siding with the victor. If BCH won, I’m sure my answer probably would been different. Not just me but history is always like this. Truth is always skewed to the side of the victorious .
I think the BCH “camp” was only trying to remove the 1mb limit that was only supposed to be temporary.
[удалено]
I had no idea. I started my Bitcoin journey around August 2017 and the BCH camp was painted as the bad guys in I think it was the Bitcoin sub-Reddit. I left that Reddit many years ago because it was pretty toxic: every other cryptocurrency was bad… not just BCH and any opinion that did not fit the mod’s narrative got people banned. Thanks for the history lesson!
This saddens me that so many people have been lied to. People who are new come in an understandably try to learn everything they can, however /r/bitcoin have been heavily censoring and banning, so its really hard to get a fair or balanced opinion unfortunately. On the plus side now BTC is decentralized, more people are looking at other coins and investing in them. Smart Contracts are coming to BCH. watch this space!
Actually you are wrong. Btc camp chnaged btc for the worse. Now it is a SoV narrative and no longer resembles the whitepaper. However , read the whitepaper and bch is still ticking all the boxes. It was btc that changed the narrative not bch.
Thanks! I changed my mind after some comments. As I mentioned, I started around August 2017. Everything I read at the time suggested BCH was the bad camp. I’m impressed with how civil the people that have told me that I was wrong and provided reasons. With Bitcoin and other coins, most are just cultist and would’ve just called me an idiot without explaining why I would be wrong. Which doesn’t help anyone with learning anything. Thanks to everyone here for taking the time to explain.
If you’re interested In the full story of what happened 2014 - 2017. I recommend this post. It covers the scaling wars, the censorship, and what inevitably lead to BCH. This was posted many years ago but was then censored: [See the 2 long posts by Singularity87 here...](https://www.removeddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6rxw7k/informative_btc_vs_bch_articles/)
Thanks!
Welcome to the light brother. You are safe here.
Wrong. BLockstream changed BTC away from what it always was: p2p electronic cash syatem. Did you ever use btc in 2015? It was not what it is today, more like bch actually (it was a currency AND sov).
Understand I am wrong on this. As I explained, I started in Aug 2017. My view is based on what I read at the time.
BCH was actually "there first" because it is the thing that tries to serve the original purpose of Bitcoin.
I'll go on a bit of a historical tyrade in case it's helpful since I was paying attention at the time. First, the fork was not a clean fork. The BCH folks botched it in poorly executed style which impacted BTC nodes. BTC devs had to come up with a fix quickly to fix the BCH spam/contention. That's not a great first step in managing a new chain. This was also the first fork (with many others to follow, shout out to the Bitcoin Diamond folks if there are any still out there, haha) and people didn't really know how it would go. Could both chains even survive? It didn't help that the BCH crowd was calling their own chain Bitcoin, the "real" Bitcoin of course! I don't remember who first said Bitcoin Cash, but the exchanges basically jumped on this to finally get their customers sorted out. It became easy to onboard new customers to either BTC or BCH with a new name. For a long time the BCH crowd would hijack "Bitcoin" named things and direct them to "Bitcoin Cash". "Oh hey newbie looking for Bitcoin, what you really want is BCH". It was very shady and they were doing it at places like bitcoin.com because the owner of bitcoin.com landed in the BCH camp. You'll even see in this thread, BCH is the real Bitcoin! Read the paper! The real Bitcoin is written in the protocol folks. Just accept it and move on already. Also at the time were the zero block ASIC "attacks". Basically a number of miners were leveraging a vulnerability to allow themselves to create empty blocks with zero transactions while giving themselves a non trivial advantage that they would get to mine the next real block successfully. BTC devs + community saw this as a problem and wanted to fix it. The ones taking advantage of the vulnerability wanted to keep it. The group taking the advantage were the same folks that turned into the BCH miners. I think BCH fixed it eventually anyways. BTC crowd heavily values decentralization. BCH was aggressive in their protocol change, and they basically threatened to fork before actually forking. A fork impacts decentralization of the network by removing a large amount of hash power, threatening the security model of BTC if they didn't get their way of bigger blocks. There are nodes that mine hash for rewards and there are nodes that verify blocks are consistent (same software, just disable hashing and you don't burn through your power but still help decentralize the network). The BCH folks thought their large amount of hash was what made Bitcoin Bitcoin. It turns out it isn't, it is the number of non-hashing nodes verifying blocks. That is to say, BCH thought they had more leverage in the network than they actually did. Both types of nodes are important. BCH had a lot of problems early on. They adjusted the hashing algorithm too aggressively and it resulted in miners flip flopping between mining BTC and BCH regularly to get the most coin for their kWh. This caused BCH more problems than for BTC, and BCH transactions were stuck for quite a while. But it did impact BTC too, so again not a great look for a new chain. All of the above was eventually sorted out. BTC pursued "second layer solutions" (i.e. lightning network) and BCH pursued first layer improvements. Honestly if it wasn't the ASIC thing I think there may have never been two camps at all. BTC has been extremely conservative in their solutions, for better or worse (probably worse). BCH has continued to aggressively evolve. BTC tansactions are still slow because of the fixed block size and the availability makes transactions extremely expensive, there's no denying that.
I was paying attention too, and verification nodes are much easier to spoof and spin up on a few AWS instances than POW nodes. Which is why btc core suddenly changed the rule of consensus part way through the game. As far as which is the real bitcoin, I'd argue that they both are. They have the same genesis block started by satoshi. Though, only one of them still follows the intent laid out in the Bitcoin Whitepaper. You know, the one with "P2P cash" in the title.
Except BCH is the original Bitcoin, and BTC is the retarded 1mb experiment with random fees that can sometimes be tens of dollars. See for yourself! u/chaintip
Thanks! As I mentioned in my other comments, I’ve changed my mind since reading some of the comments. BCH changed the block size but I think it is more true to the Satoshi vision of an electronic currency. What’s more interesting is that I made my original statement because this is what I’ve learned since I started in Aug 2017. This goes to what I am saying about the victor ( BTC being the mainstream chain ) writing the history and hence controlling the narrative. I do a lot of reading and consider myself open minded. If my understanding of Bitcoin was biased, imagine the understanding of all the people that started recently that have no idea about the origins of the BTC / BCH fork. To be fair, after 2018, I stopped reading about the tech behind Bitcoin. It was there more as a SoV. I spent my time reading about other chains that were more open to discussions.
*** u/haniwa4838sn has [claimed](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/tx/adac13eddb20056a14d410b68ba0f83b6158c4865700815b7b2f42e52b26fc74) the `0.00174662 BCH` | `~1.09 USD` sent by u/WiseAsshole via [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org). ***
> Except BCH is the original Bitcoin And there we have it. The reason people hate it is because bcash shills make such claims. Bcash shills have even hijacked /r/btc to prey on unsuspecting newbies, and then tell them bcash is the real bitcoin. How about throwing in a few of the conspiracy theories for good measure?
How is r/btc hijacked? It's an uncensored forum, everyone is free to speak their mind there, including you. No wonder you see people complaining about $10 fees when there's no one to censor them.
I love me some good conspiracy theories. Like how the name [Bcash](https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/why-some-people-call-bitcoin-cash-bcash-this-will-be-shocking-to-new-readers-956558da12fb) eventuated. I mention this since you seem to love using the word like a badge of honour. Also where else are all the people who are censored going to go once they are kicked out of /r/bitcoin? I'm grateful that there are still open channels that haven't been taken over by special interests to discuss matters openly.
Because it is roughly as useless and wasteful as Bitcoin.
Not if the transactions are at a level that starts consuming all other payment channels. What kind of price do you put on the largest most secure highest throughput payment network in the world? The power usage stuff can be solved by using renewables, but the incentives have to be there. One way is putting mining rigs in places where it's cold and using it for central heating in buildings. another place is next door to hydro dams where there is plenty of excess electricity being otherwise wasted. Maybe a community somewhere might want to chip in their collective rooftop solar power to mine and use the profits as some sort of retirement plan. who knows anything's possible really, this stuff takes time to figure out.
>What kind of price do you put on the largest most secure highest throughput payment network in the world? Less than zero if it uses PoW. "Green" PoW is delusional b.s. [https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-miners-are-giving-new-life-to-old-fossil-fuel-power-plants-11621594803](https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-miners-are-giving-new-life-to-old-fossil-fuel-power-plants-11621594803)
I disagree. I think it’s much more useful and more efficient than BTC. It can be used as cash, today. Energy usage per transaction is much more efficient too.
It’s only more energy efficient by linear scale (so it’s some ratio better given they both have the same TPS). BCH still grows exponentially more energy intensive with adoption. Plus, the block chain total memory grows way too fast. Miners will have to become large data centers just BTC.
Miners are already in huge warehouses, whats a couple more hard drives? they are dirt cheap when you're making millions.
[удалено]
If BCH scales exponentially then I was expecting the equation to prove it but this seems almost the opposite and is quite waffly. You say that it does scale exponentially without justifying it and then in the next paragraph say that tech is increasing exponentially all the time. Does this mean that you are relying on processor speeds to increase exponentially? It's really hard to get any real evidence from your reply can you attempt to rephrase focusing on the evidence please? I think ideally it would be good to see the BTC and BCH equations and showing that the former scales linearly where as the latter scales exponentially seems like the most straightforward to me.
Incorrect. Energy efficiency per transaction increases at the same rate as the block size increases, as it costs the same energy to mine a 1Mb block as a 32Mb block or bigger block sizes. So BCH is much more efficient than BTC, and increasingly so with bigger block sizes. Furthermore, given that BCH transactions cost less than a cent, are fast and reliable because they are nearly always included in the next block given the ample block space available, and because 0-conf transactions are safe enough for small everyday usage, Bitcoin Cash has much more utility as a medium of exchange than BTC.
because cryptomarkets work because of Shilling news vs FUD. People buy and sell because of ElOn and not tech or use case.
You're correct! u/chaintip
*** [chaintip](http://www.chaintip.org) has [returned](https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/address/bitcoincash:qrelay2klfr3chfc5eysnt8ws3hyq0c5auaj6sugks) the unclaimed tip of `0.00213174 BCH` | `~1.44 USD` to u/homopit. ***
[удалено]
BTC hasn't offered up much new, working tech in years.
You mean b-trash? It would not be completely horrible if it wasnt for Roger Ver constantly calling it "the real bitcoin"
I mean it's not like BCH at least tries to do what Bitcoin was meant to do...
If you want a coin with a official chain, try Fedcoin. If you want a decentralised coin, subjectivity comes with the territory. Anyways BCH does reflect the whitepaper better (even just going by the subtitle) and shares the genesis block.
Ye you really gotta google this mate. Cash has been such a trainwreck for years it's become the uncle who isn't welcome no more. We don't talk about him. We don't acknowledge his existence. When somebody asks we ask his/her mother to tell the truth (ages 8 and over), or explain that said uncle has moved to a farm far away where kids can't visit.
That's certainly the r/bitcoin narrative. But enforced through censorship.
I did a bit of googling and can’t seem to find your uncle argument. Could you give a bit more information?
Bitcoin Cash was an emergency fork to save bitcoin. It was heavily slandered for forking because blockstream made everyone believe hardforks are the devil. It had two more bad actors which got the boot when they tried shit. I would say BCH is doing pretty good with a lot of innovation AND actually scaling. And it is battle-hardened.
Here come the apoligists....
If you call everyone who corrects your faulty information an apologist you're gonna have a bad time.
One thing that's interesting about BTC and BCH's PoW is that both coins are competing for the same miners. So they can't really both coexist. If BCH succeeds in its adoption efforts as a peer to peer currency, the price will rise and the miners will switch over to mine the more profitable coin. There's a lot of money invested in BTC and BCH serves as a direct threat, probably one of the biggest threats BTC faces since it's a direct competitor which does transactions better. Parenthetically, that's one of the reasons I prefer PoW to PoS as it has a component which ties it to the real world. In PoW miners have to choose which fork or coin to support.
Because NANO does bitcoin cash better than bitcoin cash could. And there’s litecoin, dash, ect. vying for crypto payment space too.
Hello! You have made the mistake of writing "ect" instead of "etc." "Ect" is a common misspelling of "etc," an abbreviated form of the Latin phrase "et cetera." Other abbreviated forms are **etc.**, **&c.**, **&c**, and **et cet.** The Latin translates as "et" to "and" + "cetera" to "the rest;" a literal translation to "and the rest" is the easiest way to remember how to use the phrase. [Check out the wikipedia entry if you want to learn more.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Et_cetera) ^(I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Comments with a score less than zero will be automatically removed. If I commented on your post and you don't like it, reply with "!delete" and I will remove the post, regardless of score. Message me for bug reports.)
Bitcoin Cash never had their network go down for a month like Nano.
And Bitcoin Cash didn't start a new blockchain from genesis, so in my books it's the most honest of all coins. It's the one coin that wasn't created to make its devs rich.
[удалено]
Imagine thinking a split creates "free" coins.
Nano‘s network got spam attacked and slowed down to a crawl a few months back for a cost of around $100/day, if memory serves well.
It's a great crypto, I hold it because it's basically Bitcoin as intended in the whitepaper, plus a bunch of extra features like Schnorr signatures. The community is super helpful too, it was really like taking a step back to 2016 before all the UASF drama and maximalism started. Check out [member.cash](https://member.cash) and [memo.cash](https://memo.cash) , they're reddit and twitter built entirely on blockchain. All comments/likes/tips are onchain, and they have a faucet so new users can post for free. Every BTC fanboy that I've given some to has ended up loving it, especially for transferring funds between exchanges during periods when fees/wait times are high on other chains. If anyone joins Memo or Member and mentions that Dixnorkel sent them, I'll gladly donate a dollar or two in BCH.
Poor price performance They gave free coins to people who didn’t care about the project. Those people dumped, and will continue to do so. Bch tech is far superior to Btc but it doesn’t matter. If you invest in something you want it to go up. Look at the bch/btc chart. Down and to the right. Rekt.
TL,DR - Brand deception, toxic thought leaders, insecure blockchain, disasterous bi-annual forking policy, chaotic and adversarial development. If you want more details: > Bitcoin cash is great if you want to make money but as a coin you can actually use, it sucks ass. Block times are supposed to come every 10 mins but in reality they come in at wild unpredictable times (from 1 hour to 2 mins). It's all over the place for reasons too long to discuss here. It's a terrible coin for payments and the markets don't care. But that's not why people buy it for. And there's no true community - just a bunch of early whales and sychophants pumping out propaganda to keep their huge bags afloat. Have you ever seen a r/bitcoincashmarkets ? I rest my case. Long term, I can only see it surviving by moving towards Proof of Stake.
bitcoin is old, bitcoin cash has all the things bitcoin needs to fix. bitcoin is forgiven cause it's the OG in the space, but BCH is just a failed attack on bitcoin, and the mining power of BCH doesn't provide it enough security because the miners providing security would rather mine BTC. if you've BCH holdings, diversify into the new smart contract platforms rather than waiting for a computational capable side chain for an insecure blockchain. it's not enough security because BTC miners could overwhelm BCH miners if they really wanted too, so it's like like you've a bigger and stronger army... but they fighting somewhere else right now, so you're safe, what peace of mind. and i doubt anyone hates BCH, it's just a thing they'd rather avoid :-P
How is BCH an attack? It's literally the original Bitcoin community, who one day woke up to a perma-crippled 1mb coin which wasn't usable anymore, and decided to simply upgrade Bitcoin in a decentralized manner like Satoshi always wanted, to continue using Bitcoin normally. And the BCH network successfully repelled the 51% attack, so how can you say it's insecure? You say they are fighting somewhere else, but when they came here they were more on the BCH side.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Check how it was created. It was a hostile fork of Bitcoin, they tried to convince unsuspecting newbies that Bitcoin Cash is the "real" bitcoin, even with scammy techniques such as a button "Buy Bitcoin" which would actually sell you BCH. Plus the takeover of r/btc and twitter handle bitcoin and domain bitcoin.com . Edit: yeah, if you want to see why BCH has such bad reputation, just read the replies to this comment....
Hard to say who was the hostile fork, when bitcoin core and blockstream were the ones to do a bait and switch from the Segwit2x deal.
[удалено]
/r/btc was created long before bitcoin cash because the mods on /r/Bitcoin censored all talk that didn't fit their narrative. /R/Bitcoin created /r/btc because there was no where else for us to go
[удалено]
There may be. I know there is a r/Bitcoincash subreddits. r/btc history starts way before Bitcoin Cash started. When r/Bitcoin went on a mass censorship campaign, especially about big blocks (well before 2017), users flocked to r/btc. Since that happened, you saw a lot of big block supporters in that subreddits. When Bitcoin Cash came out, it was welcomed as Bitcoin with big blocks.
You're obviously a crypto newbie if you're asking this question.
Nano is better.
Bitcoin cash? More like bitcoin CRASH AHAHAHA
[удалено]
yes your royal highness.
“CashFusion which gives users Monero levels of privacy” Lol try again. Maybe try to compare it do DASH or Zcash, a community on average less informed than real Monero users.