What Do Core Think of Bitcoin Cash?

The question in the title is misleading. Because what Core think, and what Core and Blockstream want you to think and believe, are two entirely separate things.

Recently Bitcoin Core developer Luke Dashjr (aka Luke-jr) wrote an opinion piece almost entirely about “Bitcoin Cash” itself.

But before we get onto the Bitcoin Cash topic here, let me address one glaring point made by Luke early on in his piece. Given that Segwit2x is well underway now, Luke actually makes an admission – stating, and I quote “Basically, BIP148 (UASF) was an early success”. This statement conclusively reaffirms statements I made in an earlier piece that Blockstream (UASF) and DCG ( Segwit2x) are in bed together. And I’m going to restate this – big blockers have been played.

But Luke’s ponderous post is genuinely a marvel in deceit. He bewilderingly states that “Bitcoin Cash” is an altcoin, and that it is an attempt to hijack Bitcoin.

This play on words is all too common within the Blockstream camp. The hijacking came from Blockstream and no one else. But to help illustrate this point, allow me to paint this picture. Suppose you are part of an open source project. You release a founding paper specifying your project’s inner workings, methods, and overall operation. Your project is unfunded, but passionately developed within an open, transparent, thriving community. A new company emerges, and cleverly makes its way among your development team, and receives an incredibly large amount of funding from some very big players in the industry. This company then starts to weed out some of the early developers of the project, and particularly those who don’t agree with the company’s very distinct vision.

Discussion and promotion of the original founding paper is prohibited. This company then (for argument sake let’s just call it Blockstream) rewrites the project to a vision that is incompatible with its original founding paper. So then in retaliation a small group of people, some who were there in the beginning, come together, and re-launch or rather see the continuation of the original project with the original intention, following the original founding paper.

Who in the above paradigm hijacked the project? Unless you are heavily compromised, it takes no genius to figure out the answer. Blockstream took over Bitcoin, fundamentally changed its course direction, and are now actively attacking the minority who wish to retain the original vision.

Bitcoin’s community has been aggressively split for several years now. If Luke’s heart was in the right place, he should genuinely wish Bitcoin Cash all the best, and in fact thank them for going their own way, and finally ending years of dispute. Instead he chooses to attack further.

Segregated Witness is an extreme departure from the Bitcoin described in inventor, and creator, Satoshi Nakamoto’s white paper.

Satoshi in his wisdom wrote “Bitcoin can already scale much larger than [VISA] with existing hardware for a fraction of the cost.” Bitcoin was already scaleable, it didn’t need Segwit. The threat “Bitcoin Cash” poses is that it can finally prove itself, with the removal of the 1MB temporary cap it will demonstrate to the world that Core devs were lying all along, and Bitcoin can scale to astronomical heights, and operate very efficiently and securely.

So now the new agenda by Core and Blockstream is to attack “Bitcoin Cash” as an altcoin, and to discredit its position as the true Bitcoin. But anyone reading Satoshi’s whitepaper and other writings will instantly recognise that ‘Bitcoin Cash’ is indeed the coin the inventor and creator desired. But this isn’t about doing it for ‘Satoshi’. It is about recognising that there was nothing ever wrong with the original roadmap for Bitcoin. The derailment by Blockstream into Segwit isn’t for Bitcoin’s benefit, it is actually for the benefit of Blockstream and its many investors.

Luke also stated that “this isn’t a particularly unique or even first-of-kind altcoin: “Bitcoin Dark” and “Bitcoin Plus” have tried to hijack the “Bitcoin” name previously”.

Again, he mentions the term ‘hijacking’. This isn’t hijacking anything. If Blockstream chooses to fundamentally change the inner workings of Bitcoin, and a group of loyalists who truly believe in Bitcoin’s capability in its current form with the transaction cap removed choose to keep things as they are –  why should it not be called Bitcoin? Bitcoin Cash is true Bitcoin in every sense of the word, and is 100% aligned to the whitepaper description.

Luke’s stated “Bitcoin Plus” and “Bitcoin Dark” are both non-compliant to Bitcoin’s whitepaper, and further they did not maintain Bitcoin’s existing ledger as they were not forks of the main chain. Luke’s inclusion of these two cryptos is intentionally misleading.

Segwit on the other hand is so much a departure from Bitcoin’s whitepaper that if you would determine altcoins on technicalities alone, Segwit would be it, hands down. Where does the white paper mention splitting witness data?

Why should a central body, such as Blockstream, have the final say as to what Bitcoin is and isn’t? Bitcoin Cash’s value and status will in the end be determined by the free and open market, not by the rantings of a Core developer.

Written by Eli Afram

This post was originally published here and has been re-published with the permission of Coingeek and the author.


This is an Op-ed article. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com does not endorse nor support views, opinions or conclusions drawn in this post. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy or quality within the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the content. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information in this Op-ed article.


At News.Bitcoin.com all comments containing links are automatically held up for moderation in the Disqus system. That means an editor has to take a look at the comment to approve it. This is due to the many, repetitive, spam and scam links people post under our articles. We do not censor any comment based on politics or personal opinions. So, please be patient. Your comment will be published.

SHARE
This is an Op-ed article. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's own. Bitcoin.com does not endorse nor support views, opinions or conclusions drawn in this post. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy or quality within the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the content. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information in this Op-ed article.
  • Mattyoung

    BCC will find its niche and do fine.

    • CryptoCrusher

      the BCC symbol is actually already Taken by BitConnect Coin….They didn’t even research if the symbol was in use by the scrypt based coin. Sad, too sad.

  • Pangur Bán

    Brilliant! Well done article.

    • Frutiv Academy

      You have just swallowed a lie

  • CryptoCrusher

    I wish they, Bitcoin Cash, had not changed its identity. Essentially misleading anyone who attempts to research the issue. If Bitcoin Cash is indeed the original chain, then there is no reason to change its name. Sounds like a pissing contest to me. Fortunately, in the event that this transition is a farce, we can just drop the use of the one that shouldn’t be used, or not. There may be those who because of profiteering may want to direct the chain for their own interests, but really they should just make their own ICO and let people invest in it like EVERYONE ELSE DOES!

    • Joe Burns

      EXACTLY! That point is what must go viral today! BTC CASH is the original, BTC “Segwit” which is keeping the original name “Bitcoin” is the altcoin that is heading down the centralized road! This highjacking must be exposed before it ruins everything.

      • Very wise.

      • Frutiv Academy

        Bch is the hijacker here that failed

  • Very well done!

  • danystatic

    Thanks for a new and original insight on the topic.

  • Competition is good.

    • BenRickert

      Imitation isn’t competition.

      • What are you trying to imply is imitating what?

        • David Sterry

          The implemenations are networks are not compatible with each other. There are already coins on Bitcoin that don’t exist on bcash and in a few days when 100 blocks have been mined on bcash, coins will be there that aren’t and never were in Bitcoin.

          Trying to steal the Bitcoin name goes beyond immitation. It’s dishonest, confusing, and is evoking a very effective immune response from the community.

          • The first paragraph. Tell me something I don’t know. So what?

            The second paragraph. You’re an idiot. They didn’t try to steal anything. They tried to preserve something.

          • SHin D’Saint

            I don’t think so. the point of one chain it’s inevitable but two chains or even better, when bitcoin will became reality for each one of us, the third chain will appear and more if needed, till the sistem works toroughtly with rapidity and more certificated. the point is, and is not mental nor tecnical, but matematical and fisical that three chain joined remain only one bigger Chain.

          • SHin D’Saint

            History sometimes is whimsical, luck of truthfullness, Actually we don’t know what bitcoin is, have a value that is not fixed, first, second it’s own nature is byte more byte more byte more byte, all of them crypted heawely to form something that without key you actually can’t understand. But implementation are coming and understand become more difficult, I know, history tell us this clearly. Security always luck, implementation never lucking, then, cooming soon. 🙂

      • Duncan Black

        Imitation? No dude – you are ill and confused. They are very different – Segwit is an abomination which BCH have excised like a cancer.

        • BenRickert

          Wrong again knuckle fucker. BTC is still the king and trading at $3200. Your shit Coin is a joke and no one supports it. It’s already dead. Idiot.

          • Duncan Black

            Patience……..

  • xeridea

    So the argument is that BTC should stay 100% original as is as was invented 8 years ago and never change, never upgrade? Of course you could just make blocksize 300MB and scale through the roof, but that doesn’t mean it’s what is best for the coin. Segwit wasn’t mentioned 8 years ago, but that doesn’t mean it is bad. BTC was revolutionary back then, so it’s understandable that segwit wasn’t thought of. The rise of altcoins recently has been because BTC wants to stagnate forever, and use the same tech for 100 years.

    • Eli Afram

      This is again a play on words. – This isn’t about Segwit being an upgrade. Because it is not. It is a fundamental change in what Bitcoin is, and isn’t. Segwit comes with a full block policy, in order to force users onto 2nd layer technologies. This is a change in vision, not an upgrade. – To the contrary, Bitcoin is always under constant upgrade – particularly the client. What a notable number of developers and users want, is a P2P on-chain system.

      So please don’t just look at it as a technological change or improvement. This is about what the fundamentals are, and are not. The vision as pointed out in this article, is a Global Currency. That’s the original vision. But an inter-banking settlement layer was the best they could use the blockchain for?

      • The chain they want is similar to the Hub and Spoke of the banking system today. I see the attempt to track and control the flow of transactions. The 2nd layer will be fought over if it takes root. The winners will definitely hide the controls as they do today in the Banking System. In my day, the Banks used the Internet and X signalling protocols to disguise transactions and take advantage of UTC to resolve interbank transactions without the loss of time. They loved having the advantage that others did not and offered it as a service to lower echelon Banks who could not afford the equipment and Infrastructure. Fortunately, we have a very smart community and it is very difficult to pull the wool over these days. You are very wise to spot the language of confusion.

        • Gabriel Nomas

          Exactly

      • xeridea

        Segwit gets you 2-4x more transactions per block, for free. How is this not an upgrade? Lightning network is optional, and can be done without segwit, it is just much harder. I don’t understand why people think segwit goes against the original vision of a decentralized peer to peer electronic cash system, when really it is just an improvement.

        The client gets upgrades sure, but the protocol is virtually unchanged since inception, except for RBF, which they are removing, for some reason, probably so the protocol is literally 100% original as is 8 years old, and indefinitely. They think any change is somehow a slap in the face against the original vision. The community finally agrees on something after all this drama, but they are hellbent on forking just for the hell of it.

        • offchain vs onchain, which is verified first? And, who’s time on who’s equipment are you using if you do both. Then when it comes to communication, what are your delays? When we have PoW, will it be verified on both? I think they are all promises. The community of whom? The consensus has voted and some are bucking the trend of the consensus, this is why we have this confusion. We don’t have a split of the chain, we have a split on consensus. Code can be written and machines can be built and things can be better if we just say it needs a fix versus those who see it working and winning just fine without change.

        • Eli Afram

          Segwit provides you with 1.6x (at most) transactional throughput, based on the1MB partial block after sigs are pruned, and 4MB before pruning.
          This means you are getting 150% increase in throughput at 400% of the bandwidth cost. This is far from “free”.

        • Gabriel Nomas

          Be careful about Blockstream patents

          • Duncan Black

            Has Segwit been patented? If so, very, VERY suspicious. This moves me in the BCH direction. Very suspicious.

          • jap

            Indeed.

      • CryptoCrusher

        I agree. This issue of Segwit is more of an attack on its architecture to fuel controllability from outside sources. Bitcoin doesn’t need off chain linking. Changing the internal working of Bitcoin to increase transaction throughput serves 1 purpose, Greed pacification. Big business wants to make more money by getting as much as they can from large commercial BitFarms in the form of transactions fees.

        Bitcoin Mining pools ARE Centralization!

        So here is a thought,

        1. Cap the Hashrate of every node over 1TH
        2. Abolish the difficulty system for miners under 1TH/s, Make every node share the workload of the network, instead of randomly racing for the solution of the block
        3. Set a maximum value of transactions per node based on age of participation on the network relative to the maximum performance of the Node without violating recommendation 1 or 2.
        4. Pay fees only to each node with a unique public IP address (This will fuel the use of IPV6)

        Why do you think this won’t work?

        • Duncan Black

          Great proposal. I’d vote for that. Decentralisation – THAT is all important.

    • Let me know when you break SHA256d and I’ll let you know…’til then…yes it is the more evaluated coin. As for the better ideas, make a new coin and fly with their own blockchain ledger not off the back of a winner. A 300MB block wouldn’t need to scale. And the possible UASF or UAHF is only up to using it or not. It affects mining and doesn’t bring a user anything but a promise of quicker transactions and lowers fees. Both of which have been promised before. And, where are we now? It is not an argument for originality, it is a call to where we are in resiliency and clarion to those who want more from the same seed without the work and expense to cultivate.

    • Joe Burns

      xeridea – More bad misleading half-truth information. You make it sound like BTC hasn’t made any changes in 8yrs. “OG” BTC can smoke VISA anytime it wants with simple changes anytime it wants, that everyone wouldn’t mind supporting. This whole mess a powerplay that’s going to shoot all of us in the foot because it is going to shake everyones faith and breeds in fighting.

    • Frutiv Academy

      Exactly the point i have been peddling here forever, bch is just a lie of the satoshi vision, satoshi only vision is a currency that is market determined and can change into whatever it needs to as deemed fit, satoshi rhetoric is the bch lie to decieve investors but it wont work, bitcoin is gradually scalibg gracefully, but its sad that ignorant investors aremfalling for several lies

  • NAIJABOY

    all i’m seeing is a decentralised East-West power struggle. (China – US). European and US exchanges have nothing to fork about. China, Korea, Japan are hard forking.

    • crmb

      Korea, Japan ? what are you talking about

  • NAIJABOY

    maybe a well regulated bankcoin is the way forward. There is no such thing as ABSOLUTE FREEDOM.

    P.S. tokenise everything valuable.

    • Good luck with GovCoin. Fiat money has such a track record! It’s retained 4% of its value over 100 years—and that’s the most successful of the pile!

  • BenRickert

    It IS an Altcoin by every aspect of the definition. BCC is an Altcoin. Deal with it.

    • Eli Afram

      Who’s definition?

      • Cyberdexter

        By definition of this industry.

        • jap

          And who the f*** is the industry? What is their f****** authority on what is and isn’t?

          Listen I am the industry, you are the industry. Just because others say the sky is blue it doesn’t mean the sky is blue. I can tell you the sky is dark and full of stars.

    • I’m sorry, but that’s pure stupidity. BCH (BCC is something entirely different) is Bitcoin as specified by Satoshi Nakamoto. You could argue that it’s outdated, or that BTC is better, but you cannot say BCH is an altcoin. That’s just trying to pick a fight.

      • BenRickert

        How’s it looking now dumbfuck. BTC $3200.00. BCH ( altcoin ) already dead. No one can even mine it. Piece of shit. Suck it. Dimwit.

    • jap

      At this point there isn’t anymore the so called “alt coins”. How can a crypto currency be an alt coin if it can offer something Bitcoin can not? At this point we should all surpass that “alt coin” dumbass term.

      Bitcoin cannot offer what Monero offers. So is Monero an alt coin? “Alt” in this context means “alternative”, so how can Monero be an alternative to Bitcoin if Bitcoin is not anonymous? Monero could be an alternative if Bitcoin offered the same features of Monero.

      There’s many cryptocurrencies that offers many things Bitcoin does not. The technology evolved a lot and will even more. We should call the coins by their names.

      • BenRickert

        Okay…..altcoins. It means, “alternative to Bitcoin” you blubbering twit.

        • jap

          The I can call Bitcoin an alt coin since it is an alternative to Monero, you blubbering twit.

  • Natoshi Sakamoto

    Nice try, Roger, but community already realised you and your chinese boyfriend Jihan Wu are the bad guys. Bitcoin has not been asking for a savior, nor someone who thinks he’s Bitcoin Jesus. Just take your altcoin “Bitcoin C(r)ash” and be happy, I’m dumping it on the very first second.

  • Dr. Bubó

    This is political, not technical.
    What I am afraid of is losing the reputation of ‘digital gold’. A few more forks like this and it will be gone.
    You guys fail to realise that if you split the blockchain every few months and double your coins, your precious bitcoin is not any better than any other fiat money.

    • RobSa

      Some of us couldn’t care less about the price of the token.

      • Dr. Bubó

        Why is that?

        • RobSa

          Because I am not invested in it.

    • That is, of course, asinine. Offering choice is true to the market. It doesn’t matter if there are 1000 bitcoin forks. The most successful will stand out. If your chosen path is the most successful, it will prove itself to be by market competition.

    • Joe Burns

      exactly, 21 million, 42, 84, that’s like the government saying they just found 100 metric tons under a Colombian drug lords house, opps! And Alaska just hit another mother load, opps!

      • Normally, the trolls try to marginalize bitcoin by calling it “deflationary.” At least your attempt is novel. As for the price of the “free” coin, it was set by the market. The value of BTC is not back where it was before the split. I’d suggest there’s a good chance the value of BTH came out of that, in the eyes of the market. Thus, nothing was manufactured. It was split, as the terminology suggests.

        • Joe Burns

          so now I’m a troll for not agreeing with you, oh ok.
          Agreed there are still only 21m btc and 21m bch but the market cap is harder to achieve.

          • You must be linguistically challenged. I referred to the trolling attempt, not you. You came out of nowhere with posts all over hell that show disdain for and ignorance of market action. The market cap is only hard to achieve if there is real competition. The split was a split, not free coin. So far, the math indicates it.

  • Frutiv Academy

    I largely dissagree with this article, first, it didnt address why segwit is a bad thing other than just invoke a simplistic retoric of it is not the satoshi dream, who the hell care about the satoshi dream, so are going to be invoking this line forever anytime there needs to be a change, bitcoin was an experiment, and we must make changes as deem fit, please save me the satoshi retoric, there are other altcoins out there that are better than bitcoin in many ways, why cant ABC create a new crypto and then implement their satoshi dream, no one says bitcoin has to be the number one crypto, the idea that we all value is the decentralized blockchain, not the bitcoin, all these groups advocating for bitcoin in one way or the other are only fighting for their pocket, the thing is if segwit has 100% support, then it follows that bitcoin cash is an altcoin, just think about that, its simple to understand

    • You introduce a logical fallacy. Because segwit has support, that doesn’t make the original vision an “altcoin.” Keep marketing hatred and logical flaws. Agnostics such as I can see the real control freaks: the ones who must call the original vision the perversion.

      • Frutiv Academy

        Well, why is segwit a bad thing, i still want to know, the other side has not given me a good point to kick against the core guys, just name calling is what i have heard so far

        • Show me where I said SegWit is a bad thing. I never claimed or implied that. Why are you asking me? I’m for competition. I want to see which vision holds up.

          As far as name-calling and derision, I’ve seen plenty from both sides. What I find remarkable is that the SegWit crowd told the big blockers to fork off, so they did, and now they’re criticizing them for forking off. Somebody needs to grow up, and it’s not I.

          • Frutiv Academy

            Lol, well im for the free market too, bitcoin core will definately head on to success, bitcoin cash only needs to follow suit, the space is wide enough, one doesnt need to fail for the other to succeed

          • I would prefer both do well. I would profit if they do, but more importantly, the market will do better if they do.

          • What the fork is going on in this world!

      • Frutiv Academy

        Yes, segwit has all the support necessary to avoid chain split, then what the hell is bitcoin cash ? It is not as thought 50percent wants segwit and 50percent doesnt, in that case bch would have a chance to be the main chain, but as it is, it is just some guys who wants to ride on the success of bitcoin, thats all i see, anyways lets see what becomes of bch, im not totally giving up on them yet

        • Your twisted view is twisted. The big blockers don’t want to “ride on the success” of anything. They want to preserve their view of what it should be. Be happy that they have their own sandbox if you despise them so much.

    • I must admit that, while I have been following crypto currencies and blockchain technology including understanding on a technical level of how Segwit and Segwit2x works, I am saddened to learn that Bitcoin is considered the altcoin and Bitcoin Cash the true bitcoin. But there’s a big fucking problem here… If that was actually true, I would never in hell let that happen. That would rob me of my identity and can be seen as a form of solitary confinement. So given how easily Bitcoin Cash seemed to have adopted its new name and went along as if there wasn’t a mutant clone which was 10x larger walking around out there, I am very skeptical, but yet I will keep an open mind and do further research to find any patents of Segwit and other potential soft and hard forks, and study it’s suseptability of becoming further centralized. On a basic level, miners don’t give a shit and have no reason to see its blockchain becoming more centralized, they care about acquiring more fees at a faster rate than in the past. No brainer. However I can think of a couple entities which have a vested interest in carrying more grip and control over it… TBC (to be continued)

      • Frutiv Academy

        It is a big lie they are trying to peddle, dont be fooled, bitcoin cash is still one useless altcoins, bitcoin remains bitcoins, the people behind bitcoin cash are just fooling around in their halucination, plz dont believe it for a seconds bcos it would rob you of your bitcoins bcos you will be fooled into selling it to buy bitcoin cash that has no atm, cant be exchanged for cash except u first change it to bitcoins, no adoption and so on, please treat bitcoin cash as an ordinary altcoin fullstop

        • How is Bitcoin Cash holding where it is about the $300 level? I’m curious because if people panicked I would have expected a more significant price swing lower, something around 90% lower. I’m not saying BCH has any real value such as Bitcoin does. The only reason I can think of is that the largest Exchange, coinbase, hasn’t implemented it yet so people have no way of trading it. Time will tell. If Jan 1, 2018 it plunges we will know for certain, although the majority of Bitcoin trading is done overseas in Asia. Not sure how many of their exchanges support it yet either.

          • Frutiv Academy

            For the same reaeons that so many people buy into icos that are useless and buys it in hundreds of million dollars, people are, several altcoins that are as good as shit are doing better than bch, so its no miracle for bch

          • jap

            Coinbase is not the biggest exchange, not even in Europe or USA.

            BitcoinCash is being traded in many exchanges already, such as Poloniex, Bittrex, HitBTC, Bitfinex, Huobi, Kraken, etc.

            Do your homework.

          • You’re right, I’ll put an edit on the original post so people don’t make the same mistake I did.

  • Padi Tetteh

    I am patiently waiting for bittrex to give me my 0.5421 BCH.

    There can only be one Bitcoin and every other coin is an altcoin.
    I have no problem with anyone saying that Bitcoincash is “bitcoin” for whatever reason they may have. But the person must be willing to defend the fact that bitcoin(with SegWit) is an altcoin.
    But then come to think of it; Is Lee’s LTC no longer LTC?

    How I wish Satoshi N. would just show up…lol

    • Gabriel Nomas

      BCB (BitCoinBlockstream) the other is BTC

    • Duncan Black

      BCH is true to Satoshi’s white paper. Why have the core group (BTC) been supressing the white paper? Very suspicious. I am rapidly swerving away from the core group and especially Segwit – which is an abomination of Satoshi’s vision. I prefer the unadulterated BCH – as more and more people see this we will see its value increase.

  • CryptoGhana

    I am patiently waiting for bittrex to give me my 0.5421 BCH.

    There can only be one Bitcoin and every other coin is an altcoin.
    I have no problem with anyone saying that Bitcoincash is “bitcoin” for whatever reason they may have. But the person must be willing to defend the fact that bitcoin(with SegWit) is an altcoin.
    But then come to think of it; Is Lee’s LTC no longer LTC?

    How I wish Satoshi N. would just show up…lol

  • Frutiv Academy

    So the idea you guys at new.bitcoin are deploying now is to delete comment that disagree with your bias news, im goin to start an anti bitcoin.com channel on youtube to expose you guys, nonsense

    • Nanok Bie

      At News.Bitcoin.com all comments containing links are automatically held up for moderation in the Disqus system. That means an editor has to take a look at the comment to approve it. This is due to the many, repetitive, spam and scam links people post under our articles. We do not censor any comment based on politics or personal opinions. So, please be patient. Your comment will be published.

    • At News.Bitcoin.com all comments containing links are automatically held up for moderation in the Disqus system. That means an editor has to take a look at the comment content to approve it. This is due to the many, repetitive, spam and scam links people post under our articles. We do not censor any comment content based on politics or personal opinions. So, please be patient. Your comment will be published. /NB

      • Joe Burns

        where is my comment then, not even in my profile as not approved. You deleted it! It was a long manifesto and now gone forever. It had 1 link to the Congressional Reformation act of 1970, not even crypto politics and you deleted it, liar!

        • Nanok Bie

          I’ll send you a screenshot of your Disqus history with us (using your Disqus-registered email) and actions taken by moderators. You’re just going to have to accept that something else went wrong with your manifesto comment. We have not deleted or marked it as spam (it is not in your history in Disqus), however many times you say so. /NB

  • Duncan Betts

    When Satoshi said that we could scale by building datacentre nodes, I think he was wrong.

    These would be central points of control. I can imagine in the near future, that on the “Bitcoin Cash” network contentious decisions will come down to what one particular company decide, because they operate such a high proportion of the nodes, there is no chance of a UASF. At present, it is quite feasible for “Bitcoin Cash” to fork Bitcoin, and have their say. If Bitcoin or some derivative had 20MB blocks, would it be feasible then (in terms of cost), or would the users be left with the choice of moving to another coin, or following the roadmap of whoever the node operators follow? I can imagine these datacentre nodes would not be operated by many people aside a small group of mining pool operators.

  • Frutiv Academy

    Shame on you and your useless bitcoin cash, how different are you now from government and central banks ? Keep deleting my comments, this blog is a machinery in bitcoin pump and dump schemes and spreading propaganda, and now its time 4 u guys to deflect to bitcoin cash

  • What amazes me over the past 24 hours is how interested these people are in this “altcoin.”

    Methinks they doth protest too much.

    • Joe Burns

      Sometimes i hear BCH is a “token”. I’ll have to admit I don’t “exactly” know the difference between altcoin and token. There seems to be something to starting your coin on the Genesis block.
      Care to complete the equation?
      Coin =
      Token =
      Altcoin =
      I’ll go first;
      Coin = finite amount (21millon), not a security-property according to IRS 2014.
      Token = not finite, but a security.
      Altcoin = so similar to a token I can’t tell the difference.
      So what is BCH?

      • bitcoin = BCH
        Altcoin = something else
        Not sure what BTC is, but I won’t argue with those who call it bitcoin.

        The point of my post was that there have been a lot of spoiled children jumping up and down and calling BCH, which is consistent with Satoshi Nakamoto’s concept, a “altcoin,” while they support something further from it, and that’s more like an “altcoin.” I’m willing to avoid the game of nominal marginalization.

        • Joe Burns

          I know you don’t go around reading my posts, but I have been elsewhere delivering the same message. BCH original-staying decentralized, BTC heaing towards centralization and is now as much a altcoin as Etherium Classic ETC.
          I think you’re “marginalizing” that there is no difference worth mentioning between a coin and a token. Token and altcoin I would give you, but not the former.

          • I’m not marginalizing anything, and no, I’ve never heard of you. I’m not sure why you’re trying to drag me into an argument over the difference between “token” and “coin.” I’m pretty sure I explained my exception to the use “altcoin” for what amounts to the original bitcoin concept, which had been abandoned.

            I wish good luck to both parties (as I own a lot of each), and don’t care about “token.” If you want an opinion, see the dictionary. I don’t think it fits any cryptocurrency.

          • Joe Burns

            Where did you get that huge chip on your shoulder from?
            I was simply stating we have more common ground than not, but if you don’t want to stand with anyone, be your own island I won’t stop you.
            Not trying to drag you into any argument, just asking if you cared to share you’re definition as I couldn’t clearly see if there was a real difference between token and altcoin. Don’t comment, I don’t care but making me out to be a troll is projecting.
            Ahh, so you’re heavily invested, so biased, got it, no more need be said.

          • Chip on my shoulder? First remove the plank from your own eye. I referred to your other post as trollish, and you’ve dragged your butthurt into this. The point is that I DO NOT have bias. I want to see what both cryptocurrencies do. I want to see what wins in the market. I don’t CARE about anyone’s definition of “token.” I made that clear. As for “projecting,” I’m not the one who stormed in here yesterday and posted incendiary crap all over hell.

          • Oh, and it seems you’re stuck on government definitions. I don’t give a flying leap at a rolling donut about government definitions. They play with definitions to suit themselves.

          • Joe Burns

            you should care because they rule you, as long as you want to live here. Unless you in the UK or some such place, in that case, good for you!

          • They only think they rule me. They’re street gang, and their ability to control me is limited.

  • Cyberdexter

    First of all, BCC mined their genesis block on the bitcoin blockchain. The network is now 26 blocks behind the Bitcoin network and the Electrum wallet is borked as f….

    As for Blockstream, stop that stupi conspiracy talk. Look at the list of contributors to the Bitcoin code and then work out how many of those are actually part of Blockstream. After that we can talk Blockstream’s “take-over” of BTC again.

  • Joni Idris

    Competition is good. I support both.