Is BitcoinCash a joke?

[RealBitcoin]

It looks like to me that it has the same people behind it as the Bitcoin Unlimited, but it's only a couple months old:

https://www.bitcoinabc.org/  - Created Date: 2017-05-09
https://www.bitcoincash.org/ -  Created Date: 2017-03-05

They want to do a 8 MB hardfork on August 1

Bitcoin Cash provides much needed relief to users with an immediate increase of the block size limit to 8MB.

On August 1st 2017, We the People will breathe new life into Bitcoin.

I wonder of "We the People", as in 40 billion $, will trust a 3 month old website and a lame copycat of the Bitcoin Core software.

[1714045567]

1714045567

[1714045567]

1714045567

[Xavofat]

I wonder of "We the People", as in 40 billion $, will trust a 3 month old website and a lame copycat of the Bitcoin Core software.

To be fair, being a copycat is kind of a good thing. Their code is likely to be less buggy if they copy the tried and tested code and only modify small amounts of it themselves.

Anyway, I suppose we'll have to find out after August 1st who the market supports.  I agree that Bitcoin Cash doing to well is unlikely - kwukduck started a thread saying that it would do well, so now I'm quite convinced that it won't.

[BitcoinBarrel]

It sure sounds like a joke "Bitcoin Cash" 

After this whole debacle, they might as well re-name it to "Bitcoin Crash" because that's what BCC price is going to do. Then it will recover to be just like all the other "alt-coins" out there.

Bitcoin is King!

[-ck]

Yes

[flippener]

You may be right, but I won't be turning down free altcoins.

[Quantus]

yes

XT, Unlimited, classic, BTC1, Bitcoin Cash... boy do you people have a short memory.

[sweetbet]

I hope so.

[mk4]

I personally wouldn't go as far as calling them a joke just because they don't agree with having segwit, and just because they have a different proposed solution. And also just becausr they are the minority.

Eitherway, I think divided communities is expected when talking about having decentralization.

[25hashcoin]

No. It's extremely serious and should be observed by all.

[bitllionaire]

I personally wouldn't go as far as calling them a joke just because they don't agree with having segwit, and just because they have a different proposed solution. And also just becausr they are the minority.

Eitherway, I think divided communities is expected when talking about having decentralization.

i think we should not consider it as a joke because bitcoin now play important part in our life and we cannot ignore the importance of bitcoin in our life, because bitcoin is now giving livelihood to many families.

[Uberse]

Does anyone if BitcoinCash contains the malleability-problem fix that SegWit has? If it doesn't, it's dead. You couldn't use LN, right?

[williamuk]

Does anyone if BitcoinCash contains the malleability-problem fix that SegWit has? If it doesn't, it's dead. You couldn't use LN, right?

Wrong

Also:

- With segwit, block sizes that were 1Mb will become 2Mb average (up to 4Mb). So much for decentralisation and those node runners with low specs connectivity and hardware...

- LN itself is a transaction layer that would sit on top of bitcoin but also a number of other currencies (at least 4 others I've come across). LN is what people would transact with rendering the underlying currencies, in time, irrelevant (and removing bitcoin's value as a currency in the process)

- A big subject of contention is also as far as I understand, about fees. Bitcoin Core wants miners to give a 75% discount for transactions to and from LN (the LN service would of course require fees...). Assuming all transactions went through LN and existing fees cover the miners' economic costs of processing transactions it would require that native bitcoin fees go up by a factor of 4 to cover the deficit

- There is no solid logic I have come across that would require bitcoin block sizes to stay at or below 1Mb. The original design allowed for block size growth. The extent of the efforts put into stopping bitcoin from growing and scaling natively is not meaningfully and maturely explained. Segwit proves that keeping block size low is NOT an issue.

- Segwith, LN technologies are at least in part patended by one or more private companies including Blockstream, a company that employs people at the top of the bitcoin core development team. These people are, as far as I know, hiding the nature of their patents.   How does that fit with bitcoin's decentralised, open source nature and philosophy? Since when are open source developers supposed to behave that way?

Something is very wrong with bitcoin's governance and that raises fundamental questions about it's future.

At least we know miners' motivations: they want to make as much money as possible from bitcoin and for that they need it to succeed.

The bitcoin core leadership and the companies they are associated with seem to focus mostly on developing other technologies and on making sure bitcoin won't scale natively. What is their motivation, what are their vested interests? Is it about development as they claim to some or is it about being in business for themselves?

[BitWhale]

It's not intended as a joke, but it is pretty humorous to watch them try.

Personally, you'd think if they were going for the kill they would've at least picked a better name.

Bitcoin Cash. Why not Bitcash? Bitmoney?

No lets go with a name that sounds super redundant like Bitcoin Cash...

That being said, I'll hold my free BCC. Things get pumped, BCC will have its day just like every other altcoin this season.

[gmaxwell]

Their code is likely to be less buggy if they copy the tried and tested code and only modify small amounts of it themselves.

LOL.  As if...

In realty they've made a hundred tiny commits "reformatting" a couple lines here and there, seemingly to obfuscate the changes.

The diff against the Bitcoin Core they forked from is:  551 files changed, 54096 insertions(+), 47943 deletions(-)

The diff against Bitcoin Core master is:  813 files changed, 76156 insertions(+), 63863 deletions(-)

Does anyone if BitcoinCash contains the malleability-problem fix that SegWit has?

It doesn't, its still fully vulnerable to tx malleability.  Though it does copy the signature hashing algorithm from segwit (LOL so much for their concern trolling about segwit being 'patented')  it applies it in a way that leaves the malleability problems.

[aso118]

It looks like to me that it has the same people behind it as the Bitcoin Unlimited, but it's only a couple months old:

https://www.bitcoinabc.org/  - Created Date: 2017-05-09
https://www.bitcoincash.org/ -  Created Date: 2017-03-05

They want to do a 8 MB hardfork on August 1

Bitcoin Cash provides much needed relief to users with an immediate increase of the block size limit to 8MB.

On August 1st 2017, We the People will breathe new life into Bitcoin.

I wonder of "We the People", as in 40 billion $, will trust a 3 month old website and a lame copycat of the Bitcoin Core software.

The Bitcoin Cash held by the forum won't be exchanged for bitcoins. I wouldn't ask you to write the idea off completely.
If Bitcoin doesn't handle scaling well, we could see some tired people heading for Bitcoin Cash.

[zarados]

May be its more a bluff than a joke. Once,I think BCC is an abbreviation of bitcoin classic, but it turns out BCC is bitcoin cash  , as other members say, with a blocksize segwit from 1 MB to 2MB, suddenly anyone doing 8MB hardfork on 1st August? That's even 4 times of 2MB, do you believe this? If it is true, should we need to take it into account in making a decision before 1 August arrives. Whether this includes action to replace the current position of the king (bitcoin).

[Ikron]

With the BIP91 looking stable, seems that BCC would be just in the piles with the other alts.
But if it suddenly turns around laughing at us in the future-then I would reconsider myself in front of a mirror.

[BTC-BTC-BTC]

I don't see there is a team working on the project anywhere.

[erep]

I heard there are some exchanges which already give your these coins by holding your Bitcoins. You can actually trade them which doesnt even exist. I am still thinking of claiming it but decrypting your wallet is not a good thing for me.

[RealBitcoin]

yes

XT, Unlimited, classic, BTC1, Bitcoin Cash... boy do you people have a short memory.

They are just rebranding the same failed project over and over again, aren't they?

It looks to me that they are desperate to gain control over BTC, but it's not happening though.

I personally wouldn't go as far as calling them a joke just because they don't agree with having segwit, and just because they have a different proposed solution. And also just becausr they are the minority.

Eitherway, I think divided communities is expected when talking about having decentralization.

Ok good point, but you can't take them seriously if they rebrand their project every few months.

Was their software tested in a testnet? Wast it reviewed by security experts? I don.t think so, so how can we trust them with 40 billion $ then?