BCH, for all the bluster and squealing has barely any actual users, adoption that amounts entirely to dummy apps to advertise for BCH itself, and an active marketing team comprised of embittered egomaniacs who failed to take control of Bitcoin development last year. It's a squeaky wheel, that's all.
Only Bitcoin matters, and make no mistake, it is the one everyone already calls Bitcoin. The ONLY legitimate Bitcoin blockchain proceeds from an unbroken chain of majority consensus starting at the genesis block in 2009. That is Bitcoin, period. A BCH coin is not compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain from any time 2009-2018, pre or post fork. It's a completely separate network and coin altogether.
BCH relies on an appeal to the authority of the whitepaper and retrospective interpretation of Satoshi's intent to backfill validity for their knockoff as "Bitcoin". The problem is, none of that is binding. The whitepaper prescribes, and does not define. Code defines; consensus is the ONLY binding governance. And BCH completely fails on every objective measure to actually BE Bitcoin. All it can do is make arguments and hope subjectivity will eventually trump objectivity. The futility of this scheme is akin to jumping off a bridge and trying to convince the water not to kill you when you land.
Make no mistake: there is no actual debate. It's not even that Bitcoin won, it's that the big block takeover never got off the ground in the first place. The shadow of that minority cabal still lingers because of embitterment at such a complete and humiliating loss. They failed to unilaterally influence development in their sham NYA, as they should have. All that remains is squealing by the same handful of very conspicuous stakeholders running disinfo platforms. It's all smoke and mirrors.
Bitcoin is Bitcoin. BCH is a counterfeit, and no appeal, no authority, no argument, no expert, nothing will change that. Don't fall for the social engineering campaign.
why do you even write this, no one gives a fuck about bcucks
Wyatt Anderson
Nobody cares about bitcoin anymore. It's old tech.
Connor Sanders
I guess we'll find out by EOY, won't we?
David Peterson
how can i get into blockstream's payroll? :3
Nolan Price
Nice try. Literally all data confirms my position. I repeat: ALL. Asking me to provide data points is like asking me to prove the sun exists. I could, but I'd be playing into the same rhetorical game I mentioned in the beginning. My evidence is total, BCH's is literally nonexistent. Don't try to wedge fallacious symmetry into this discussion.
Logan Lopez
bcore does not work as a currency, its a neckbeard project. piss off neckbeard
Liam Mitchell
bitcoin is p2p electronic cash (currency). bcore isn't a currency, therefore it can't be bitcoin. Is that objective enough?
Diverting from the truth by making a bunch of useless arguments based on concepts that are not fundamental will just waste your time friend
Lincoln Flores
1-2k EOY
Wyatt Reed
ok, if you are not in their payroll, can you hire me as a shill? seems pretty obvious you would benefit from it
Dominic Fisher
"BCH relies on an appeal to the authority of the whitepaper and retrospective interpretation of Satoshi's intent to backfill validity for their knockoff as "Bitcoin". The problem is, none of that is binding. The whitepaper prescribes, and does not define. Code defines; consensus is the ONLY binding governance. And BCH completely fails on every objective measure to actually BE Bitcoin. All it can do is make arguments and hope subjectivity will eventually trump objectivity. The futility of this scheme is akin to jumping off a bridge and trying to convince the water not to kill you when you land."
Thanks for playing directly into my hand.
James Perry
BTC is also not compatible with the original blockchain, that's what a hard fork is.
Noah Kelly
BTC is the same speed and has the same fees in sats as bcash. They're both pretty lousy as everyday currency for small purchases.
Connor Rogers
BTC is the fork not BCH... Bitcoin is a chain of signatures not a hashchain (segwit) and doesnt rely on lightning to scale.
Jacob Hall
BTC hasn't hardforked since satoshi did it last, you're just outright lying.
Daniel Miller
They are both forks of the original Bitcoin chain of which is dead.
Isaac Thompson
I don't understand the obsession with claiming the Bitcoin Name. It's just a fucking name. Being bitcoin doesn't guarantee infinite growth.
Benjamin Howard
How else are they going to sell a scam coin that is slower and technically inferior to the majority of altcoins? Hijacking an existing brand is all they have to work with. It wouldn't even make top 100 crypto list without trying to trick users.
Angel White
that would be true if the protocol was never upgraded. The dev team can write code that sends all coins to invalid addresses and make it unusable and brainwash everyone to agree it's a good thing. Since everyone agrees, it's bitcoin xD. Your argument doesn't work because the consensus rules change over time, making any one of them meaningless since it's not truly decentralized and enforceable by code, as long as you force people to download all the new clients. Irrelevant to what I said
Landon Butler
That's all they have.
Jose Ward
>Irrelevant to what I said Ok then, since they are around the same speed and TX cost how is one a currency while the other isn't.
Lincoln Moore
I never mentioned bitcoin cash in any of my posts. I'm sorry if it was unclear since this thread is about bitcoin cash but I don't care about any shitcoin. I will always use usd until I see a clear economic benefit for most people to be using shitcoins, which I think it won't happen ever, but if it does, I'm browsing and keeping up with the scene since I trade
Charles Bell
To add to my post, my stance is that the only possible bitcoin is bitcoin cash. Whether it does what it promises or not, they're are the only ones trying
Caleb Price
we already found out - Bcash lost
Gabriel Cook
What exactly have they done that is trying to make it more of a currency? It's slower and scales poorly compared to many other crypto.
Thomas Peterson
Daily reminder that the routing problem that lightning is trying to tackle is unsolvable and even the tier 1 isps and internet backbone has to rely on a non adversarial trusted environment. Aka. Not one that will work with money. Maintaining a routing table of changing balances is impossible and frequent collisions and payment failures will be common with any volume.
Kevin Kelly
BCash would have gone further if they weren't so hellbent on the disinformation campaign.
Gavin Butler
Stellar seems to be making headway just fine in terms of their Lightning implementations.
Jose James
Lightning might fail, still no reason to buy into the bcash scam, better alts around with promising scaling solutions.
Henry Collins
they have 0 conf. transactions which works fine for small transactions and waiting 10 minutes for bigger ones is not a big problem. I'm just talking about the core vs cash debate. I'm sure a lot of other cryptos have better ideas and not claiming bitcoin cash is the best, just a possible way of salvaging the original bitcoin idea. Other cryptos can do it as well though, I don't care, but something a bit different may be needed
Aaron Wood
Get a real job loser.
Julian Mitchell
That is because you don't understand the difference. They are using the same end client routing. That is like your computer telling the isp what path to take. It might work for stellar because so much is held by them compared to Bitcoin but it will still have the same routing issues at scale. Tell me genius how do you maintain a routing table when the capacity for every routine changes constantly.
Adrian Ramirez
thank you for advertising Bitcoin Cash. reminder that weve already won
Yeah, that is because you don't believe in Bitcoin anymore. You want Bitcoin to die. We still believe in Bitcoin and want it to be the world currency that it deserves to be.
Hudson Long
There's really only room for one PoW blockchain to succeed in the end and if Bitcoin Cash continues to increase blocksize it will fail regardless.
Sorry.
Cooper Morales
All of the developers that wanted bigger blocks have abandoned BTC for BCH. I don't see anything happening on BTC, no excitement, no future plans, nothing at all to discuss. Just hopes for Lightning Network to actually work one day. Even if they backtrack now and actually increase the max blocks I doubt any talent will forget the past and come back.
Don't worry, bitcoin won't be sad if it fails - It's an inanimate piece of software
Adrian Cook
block height 478558 marks the block where the bitcoin network split in two. Every block before that shares the same history on both networks. One of the networks implemented segwit and the other simply raised the max blocksize. Segwit to enable bitcoin scaling with existing economy. Raising the blocksize to let bitcoin grow a new economy. At the time the “fork” happened, the segwit version of bitcoin had most support and money behind it. It still has, but what makes you so sure it will always be like that?
An economic shitstorm is on the horizon, and it is a fucking big one. When the storm hits, we will see which network people trust their money with. Satoshi began this project after the last economic crisis, to let us create a new economy, we all are a part of. The segwit network, “Bitcoin” or “BTC” will be destroyed under a new financial crisis. “BCH” or “Bitcoin cash” might actually be able to survive such crisis and supply a new economy to the whole world that is in need. Bitcoin can fix so many different things for humanity, just so sad to see brain dead idiots like you slow the process down. Fuck you.
Jason Gonzalez
>Every block before that shares the same history on both networks. 478559 was the first block that BCH mined. So every block before and including 478558 shares the same history on both networks.
There is only room for one PoW, the winner will be the one that the miners support. When was the last time Jihan shared a stage with blockstream?
Cooper Cook
If you believe in the tech and not simply claiming the name "Bitcoin" why don't you look at superior technologies such as Stellar? SCP is vastly superior to PoW and PoS and it's a non-profit and the source is completely open.
I'm not seeing where you're coming here if it's all about the tech.
Landon Howard
The irony about this meme is that BTC will become an even more powerful sith lord and cut BCH in half in a couple decades
because this shitcoin pops up in every BCH fud thread. fuck off. i'm not buying your bags faggot and neither should anyone else
>b-but i don't own any stellar >i'm just here to discuss the tech
sure...sage
Bentley Kelly
I have a bridge to sell you if you think BCH is at all superior to Stellar in any way, shape or form.
Nathan Reed
It's not all about the tech, but also the economic principles that pow brings and how bitcoins history and ledger is. Don't know much about SCP, but doubt it brings a better economy than Bitcoin will. That's if Bitcoin is allowed to grow.
Gavin Hernandez
I don't think we're ever going to keep a truly decentralized currency and if that happens it's likely going to be Bitcoin.
Social engineering campaign appeals to authority of idiot beards and implores clueless assholes not to listen to nonexistent social engineering campaign from opposing viewpoint that literally just wants to execute on the original vision for the project and is annoyed at the obvious hijacking and sabotage. I wonder if people here are stupid enough to fall for this. Let's see.
>Only Bitcoin matters, and make no mistake, it is the one everyone already calls Bitcoin. The ONLY legitimate Bitcoin blockchain proceeds from an unbroken chain of majority consensus starting at the genesis block in 2009. That is Bitcoin, period. A BCH coin is not compatible with the Bitcoin blockchain from any time 2009-2018, pre or post fork. It's a completely separate network and coin altogether.
imagine being this technically illiterate
unironically kill yoruself you dragons den shariablue cunt
Cameron Martinez
The USA's CIA appreciates your continued support. Our current plan is to continue to sell as we have bills due from our most recent foray in Syria and a major push upcoming in Venezuela
Evan Parker
>b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but Satoshi wanted BTC to be a currency and BTC is not a currency because pgnweng Fuck off. Satoshi is a moron. His idea for the blockchain is innovative and his idea to apply it to a digital, P2P, decentralized currency is genius; but his idea doesn't make much sense: >a currency whose price is determined by the market >if there's too many transactions, the price drops (this is not a technical limitation but rather how the market works) and the transactions take longer (this is a technical limitation) It doesn't scale. Just like a lot of Internet protocols, it does the job good enough but fails when used in the real world because the author couldn't foresee how it would actually work IRL. BTC and BCH still have their uses, but the e-drama that ensued is fucking pathetic and totally useless. What the devs are doing are just small patches that won't fix the overall issue of BTC: it doesn't scale up.
Don't forget that bcashies have bought the bitcoin.com domain and use the bitcoin twitter handle and masquerade as the real deal as well.
Roger has even whined about not being treated favorably on reddit and i'm sure that faggot would have loved to own the reddit bitcoin page as well.
Samuel Garcia
It doesn't scale when you put an artificial capacity limit on it for no reason whatsoever, anymore than your car doesn't perform when you try to drive it while leaving the handbrake on. That doesn't mean it can't. That means the operators are stupid.
It literally doesn't. You can try to patch it like the BCH guys are doing, but that doesn't fix the issue. The problem is in the architecture and how the fucking market is supposed to work. You would need to either rewrite it, find a magical solution or keep patching it until it ends up being an abomination like X11 or modern web browsers. Because even the patches made by BCH would cause trouble if the number of transactions keeps upping.
Wyatt Gomez
hey turbo shill nice to see you today.
Jace Young
Do you really think "it literally doesn't" is going to slide with this audience? That's literally not ah argument. Satoshi did the math back in 2008 for visa scale. BU has been running a gigabyte testnet for some time now, and the presentation they did on scaling bitcoin goes into all the architectural inadequacies of the core client that currently hamstring it. If you seriously want to convince anybody at all in light of the above, you're going to have to do much better than "does not". But let's be honest, you're not going to do that because there is no argument.
>our God did the Math and it is His Word that the Holy Network can scale, so it shall be so Then why didn't he make sure it could scale up? The only fact here is that the shit he did cannot scale up and what the BCH guys are doing is just a small patch. The network realistically shouldn't grow enough to give them problems in the next decades, but the fact that it's just a mediocre patch stands. It does not solve the scaling problem, it just moves it to a future date. Which is kind of what programmers like to do nowadays, but it always comes back to bite the user's in the ass. I don't even care about BTC, btw.
Adam Torres
You're still not saying why it can't scale.
Evan Green
bch has half the daily transactions of doge it's a dead shitcoin and shills use half cooked conspiracy theories and identity politics to appeal to 95iq Brainlets who think they know it all
Easton Long
Solving scaling problems in production technology deployments is *all about* moving the ceilings back to the latest practical date at the lowest possible cost without compromising the value of the system. That you fail to understand the value of the system and think moving 99 percent plus of transaction volume off chain where it can't be easily seen and audited and is subject to whatever behind the scenes manipulations parties may subject it to doesn't mean those things aren't real risks. It just means you never actually understood bitcoin. The fact of the matter is that it is both practical and desirable to have an on chain throughput level vastly superior to the artificial cap forced on bcore, and the only reason this hasn't been done is Maxwell's bloated ego, blockstream's business plan, and their investors salivating about taking control of this new market with the illusion of grass roots ground up support while they offload the festering toxic assets of the old economy onto idiot bagholders "chasin dat paper yo". That is the real purpose the 1mb block limit serves.
Note the continuing lack of actual arguments, but the emergence of random idiots chipping in with witless one liners that effectively reduce to emotional exhortations and tribal identity signalling. This is what an attempt to manipulate emotionally looks like.
The real reason is long term dissipation of block rewards and necessity of keeping fees sufficiently incentivising for miners.
It's still a valid argument.
Easton Kelly
you have no argument, just cramming a lot of bullshit into your posts btc is bitcoin bch is another failed Fork majority of the community is behind btc, the ones who aren't only care about their own personal interests (bitmain and ver for example) tether prove me wrong you literally cannot
Easton Jones
No. It's not. More on chain throughput equals more fee paying transactions for miners, more adoption and use means more price growth which in turn makes providing network service even more valuable, and so on. Maxwell's vision is so economically ignorant it's not even wrong, and his proposed solution actually courts the result he fearmongers about. Artificially imposed on chain caps and moving the majority of transactions to another layer and closing out channels on chain almost never, however, certainly actually does pose extreme and potentially intractable problems for mining, and thus by extension the entire core rube goldberg machine. Credit where it is due though, this is at least actually an argument, just not a good one.
Majority of the community is not behind btc. Prove me wrong, you literally cannot. See how astroturfing and manufacturing consensus works? Anyone can do it and without a sybil proof signalling mechanism it's just people making unbacked assertions.
10 billion transactions a day with 1/2 cent fees makes miners just as much as 10 million transactions a day with $5 fees. Though if fees are $5 nobody is going to use bitcoin. Even if it's just to charge up my lightning wallet once a month I won't be using bitcoin if it costs $5 to do so.
Owen Hughes
nice non argument the market has spoken btc has 10x the use of bch deal with it
Dylan Long
>Majority of the community is not behind btc. Yeah, you're going to have to try a lot harder.
Josiah Gutierrez
>nobody
nobody will use it to buy a coffee sure, but for a small million dollar order of coffee beans it doesn't really matter if it's $5, $0.05 or $50. we don't so much need adoption from people as we do their money, right now we see ethereum with higher daily TX but more money still moves through the bit coins.
Hudson Sanchez
i have good word from higher up within the us that brian armstrong, ver, and charlie lee will all be arrested soon
Oliver Gomez
BTC marketcap is less than 50%. That is, by definition, a minority.
btc is the biggest market cap and has actual money in it unlike the countless inflated mc shitcoins that are worth literally nothing other than the fact some retard will give up his btc for them
Gabriel Torres
That's correct. But the majority of the "community" does not back BTC.
