Bitcoin Forum

I was looking at this coin in slightly more detail and it has a much larger blocksize and was the original bitcoin.
So, why do most people want this coin to become just another altcoin or pump and dump coin when it is basically the same as the other bitcoin but with a better blocksize and more transactions that can fit into the block?

Because raising the blocksize means more centralization, there's no way around this. As of right now, we do not need a blocksize increase. The mempool is far from full, and now we will have almost 4MB of effective blocksize with segwit. The idiots wanting to hardfork in 3 months into some rushed software developed by Garzick whose works for a company that spies on people's bitcoins have lost their mind.

They will crash the price again. Big blockers hardfork news = price crashing. Everyone hates them.

This is the debatable part.  You see, satoshi used to agree that the block size could be increased via alerts to old nodes to upgrade and a change at a certain block number.

But some people who were around at the time no longer think that.  For example, theymos has opposed it for years (since long before the drama about it began).  It's possible that satoshi may have reacted differently seeing that SPV security isn't completely trustless.

Some people oppose larger block sizes because they like a large number of nodes to be run.

Also because its main proponents are colossal jackasses who are using this event to cause disruption.

If segwit, as you say, makes the block size essentially 4MB then isn't that leading to more centralisation? Also, I didn't expect it'd increase it by that much.
So why is every node accepting this? I know we have the weirdness of bitmain who have been reported to be trying to take over bitcoin cash and manipulating how it functions (either that or the segwit chain).
But, surely, if this was a truly decentralised network, this could easily be rejected.

The fear the 1M decentralization ideology cant be hold much more longer just by spreading propaganda. And the natural reaction to fear is agression.

Satoshi wanted 1 MB blocksize, so I support him.

Create an alt-coin if you think you have a better idea. We should leave Bitcoin alone to honor Satoshi and as an experiment. Why risk ruining Bitcoin when it has been running 8+ years solid.

If we start forking every time a group of people wants to reinvent BTC, where will this bring us? Plus, a free crypto? If we follow that path, crypto s dead. Those are reasons why I hate Bitcoin cash.

The negativity is just because of the increasing support for bitcoin as well there is a good number of user who trust in it. In one way bitcoin cash has solved some issues that has been considered to be the major flaws on bitcoin. Same time in terms of mining, only large scale users has got the chance to mine.

Wow, I thought transactions with BCC will go faster. If that's true then indeed we can't call it cash. From 10 to 30 minutes is what we have to wait for the first confirmation with BTC if transaction fee is high enough. Why would we need BCC then?

Its not the negativity over the bitcoin cash,its the reality.Its surprising for me to hear some one say bitcoin cash as the original bitcoin.Already segwit is enough for quick transactions and there is no need for more bigger block sizes.BCC is created not in aim for progress of bitcoin community but instead i read that ASICBOOST is patented and it does not support upgrades like segwit and that may be one of the reason for creating BCC.

Some are against big blocks.
Some are against chinese miners because they are, well urm, chinese from China.
Some don't understand and don't care because they are speculators who want to make fiat money the easy way.
Some are just plain idiots spreading FUD.
Some are ... (fill in anything you want).

Just stay calm and the ride the storm of negativity.

It is what it is, but I believe it makes BTC weaker and sets a precedent that any disagreements can be settled by forking. Too much of this it will just be a confusing mess of low grade coins.

i think because better blocksize, is bad for centralization, and the first limit of 32MB was removed for good reason, don't live in the past, bigger blocksize it's not the right way to scale

He wanted 32 at first?
Bitcoin cash is the bitcoin we've already been using. With the addition of the block size change. It's a smaller change than segwit. Seems there's also a problem against Jeff Garzik by some bitcoin users. But based on the history of Chinese mining history it's fairly reasonable to be cautious.


It's the result of a chain split. Not sure on the details very much but I think it's more of an accidental/easiest way to resolve the issue.
And if you have a problem with the 10 minute blocks (which should really have been addressed) your problem exists in bitcoin as well.

People don't "want" Bcash to become a shitcoin, people are making their predictions about the potential value of bcash network. So far it's not looking good, because there's no innovation. It's just another copypaste of Bitcoin, something that anyone can do without any in-depth technical knowledge. 8 mb blocksize isn't innovative, there are lots of coins (including Bitcoin forks) with similar or bigger blocksize. People around BCH constantly attack BTC, its community and devs, while not actually adding anything to crypto community, so it's only natural that most people have negative opinions about BCH.

Why, because BCC=UAHF=BUAHF (bitmain user activated hard fork)
It's centralization of the coin, wholly against the btc community's current  wishes, and the founding philosophy of the coin,  and precisely the reason it will fail.
Now, it could be as others mention, just a "new coke" and "coke classic" scheme designed to stir up interest and fluctuation in the market. Where fluctuation exists, so do traders who stand to make alot of BTC or $$$

BCC discussion must be done in the Alternate cryptocurrencies part of this forum.


BCC is an ALT like hundreds of others coins , is not a fork.

People who are forking the network are the ones who stalled upgrade for the past year or so, now they are abusing bitcoin trademark and brand and trying to make money from thin air.

It is a fork, eventually most of the digital currencies we're forked out of bitcoin. It is another alternative coin but you can't say that it is not a fork. Also, it is BCH.

Because bitcoin is my older brother but bitcoincash is my step brother

YADA YADA YADA!
Whatever, it will cause troubles to the existing miners because of the stupid move aka "splitting" & let the negativity rush in!
I don't care about bitcoin cash thats fucking bullshit!
Whoever came up with that idea is a fucking moron!
Who needs to disrupt bitcoin when its already formidable than ever? Any clues? These jackass don't give a shit, but I do!
Ill oppose this bloody movement any day!

It is a difference of opinion, because on the one side {BCC} people think by increasing the Block size, Bitcoin can scale

enough to enable mainstream adoption and one the other side people think that SegWit and the Lightning network is the

answer to this. Some people even think they know what Satoshi would have done or what he would have wanted. Nobody

knows if he would have changed his mind on scaling, if SegWit & Lightning Network was proposed to him.  ::) A difference

in opinion, creates conflict, because people always wants to be the winner in an argument.  >:(

Yes, the creation of bcc is a bad idea. But considering we have very little controls of the supposed decentralised network (evidenced by this) the idea of both btc and bcc hereafter is not a community controlled coin.
And the new fork, as I understand it is put in place so segwit2x canbe used and so segwit can function (although, they should've found a cleaner way to do it)?

You might want to read or re-read Satoshi's whitepaper, specifically the title "P2P Electronic Cash System"

The only thing what Bitcoin Cash trying to solve are high fees. Lets see what happens if Bitcoin fees become very high again, then Bitcoin Cash might be good alternative, especially because every current Bitcoiner have equeal amount of Bitcoin Cash so the transition to Bitcoin Cash might be trivial for every Bitcoiner.

I have nothing to fear because competetion is the best way to find effective solution and I have equeal amount of Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash anyway...

Well, not always anyway.

Yeah but wasn't it implied that BCH is somehow better in that regard? If bitcoin cash have same problems as bitcoin why do we need the hard fork?

Bitcoin holders are making more on BCH than BTC at the moment, you'll see attitudes change.  Hasn't really hurt BTC too badly yet, we'll see in the long run.

There can only be 21 mln bitcoins everything else is a crap  8)

Yes so we can say that it's not negativity in fact but it's the support and trust which we have in bitcoin which we show from time to time or whenever it's needed.

Its the propaganda. You see, this is more about politics than anything else. Do your own research because with even opinion you get here, it comes with personal agenda and biases. Someone here wrote that Satoshi agreed that blocks can be raised as high as they can be. Then goes on to say some people who were there disagrees. Now all im asking is, we are now using Satoshi's bitcoin. Where is the "bitcoin" started by those people?

Secondly it is only after segwit implementation that bitcoin cash will be closer to Satoshi's bitcoin than bitcoin legacy.

And right now they are not. BCH has dropped almost 15% in the last 24 hours. It looks like the fairy tale is coming to its end.

Looking at rising and falling of other altcoins you can almost always say that someone could make more profit on this or that alt, that's how it is. But when you try to earn bigger profits bigger risks are involved too, never forget about that.