Why bitcoin cash (BCH) is a poor idea.

[steelhouse]

The main idea behind BCH is that they are going to allow as many transactions as possible to allow micro-transactions to take place for a low fee.   They use ideas like Moores Law that says hard disk space can increase to cover all transactions forever (although there is no proof). The coin will become centralized over time possibly running on maybe 1000 servers or less. 

The reason why it is a poor idea is it will become too costly to do spinoffs.  Bitcoin has already had 2 code changing ideas, the lightning network and  segwit.  Imagine over time, leaders of BCH are going to come up with more ideas.  But, unlike spinoffs, you are going to be locked into the BCH system because it will be too costly and complicated to move. Governments will start to takeover these networks.   And if it is not government it will be pseudo government entities like large mining pools or icons like Roger Ver.  Small miners might be locked out altogether.

If BCH is going to become centralized, why not just use a fee-less centralized system with off-chain transactions.  https://www.fliptopay.com/ . I noticed this site.  Basically you transfer bitcoin to a centralized wallet.  From there you have virtual bitcoin and can convert to USD or Euros.  There you can use the currency at any android pay store.  Note this is not fee-less, but it easily could have been.  blockchain.info wallet is basically off-chain.  All transactions on these type of sites, between its users and stores, are off-chain, and take zero space or fees on the chain.  Yet they work instantaneously.

The true value of bitcoin can be considered the bitcoin complex.  If you own bitcoin in 2016, you now own several coins BCG, BCH, BCD, BTC, ...  All these coins together can be considered the bitcoin complex and it is this total value is what you should compare to the dollar.  I would actually like to see a coin that ends mining rewards and cuts the block size by 90%. To make the coin more like Island of Yap stone money where transactions are rare.  Where people are not digging gold out of one hole and putting it in another hole the bank vault.  Where the average person makes one transaction per year.

Just a rant and didn't know where to put it (other than my nose).

[1715182322]

1715182322

[1715182322]

1715182322

[tora]

Bitcoincash has had a good price increase recently,although dropped by double digits today, so there must be a good core of investors interested in this coin.

[Findingnemo]

Bitcoincash has had a good price increase recently,although dropped by double digits today, so there must be a good core of investors interested in this coin.

Yes you are right when the bitcoin cash arrives it will be in a good value but when the price of all crypto currencies are fall it is also down but it will increases to a good value.

[DooMAD]

The main idea behind BCH is that they are going to allow as many transactions as possible to allow micro-transactions to take place for a low fee.   They use ideas like Moores Law that says hard disk space can increase to cover all transactions forever (although there is no proof). The coin will become centralized over time possibly running on maybe 1000 servers or less.  

The reason why it is a poor idea is it will become too costly to do spinoffs.  Bitcoin has already had 2 code changing ideas, the lightning network and  segwit.  Imagine over time, leaders of BCH are going to come up with more ideas.  But, unlike spinoffs, you are going to be locked into the BCH system because it will be too costly and complicated to move.

This may turn out to be true, but from an economic perspective, surely it's still better for them to try it out and then know for sure, rather than just making an assumption?  If it transpires that on-chain scaling isn't viable due to centralisation, at least we'll then have the evidence to demonstrate it as fact.  In this regard, I tend to view BCH as a "testnet-after-the-fact".  More of a "what if" than an actual contender for market dominance.  

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "spinoffs", but it doesn't look as though they're having trouble making changes to the BCH codebase, as they're about to increase their maximum blocksize again, currently scheduled for 15th May 2018.  The lack of SegWit and Lightning in BCH isn't due to cost or complication, it's more of an ideological difference.  BCH supporters simply don't approve of those particular ideas.  They forked away because they have a different vision of how this should work.  If it does emerge their economic vision proves to be a mistake, it's their loss.  Either way, it's all useful (and interesting) data.  

[Pearls Before Swine]

Good points made here, and I would also argue that what we don't need is another altcoin, especially not another fork of bitcoin.  I don't think BCH offers any real advantages over bitcoin (or any of the many cryptos already on the market), so the bottom line that we don't need it.

On the other hand, lately I've seen a few merchants begin accepting BCH, so that isn't a bad thing.  It never is when businesses expand the number of coins they'll accept, and the low fees don't hurt...except currently bitcoin's fees are quite low.  Who knows if that's going to continue.  We've seen times when bitcoin is practically unusable because of fees. 

Anyway, BCH never was and never will be a viable competitor to bitcoin.  It doesn't have the community, and that's probably the most important factor.  If people don't even want to own a coin, it's chances for ever getting used for something other than speculating are nil.

[bobo012]

It is a bad idea because it has been marketed as real bitcoin, and is calling bitcoin bitcoin core. Also it is deceiving investor to think they are getting bitcoin while they are buying bcash. Also they are salty when you say bcash but it is ok to call btc bitcoin core

[steelhouse]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "spinoffs"

spinoff is where you  get equal amounts of the new coin when it is created (thus all old bitcoin users have BCH and BCG).   BCH has saved bitcoin users money already since the transactions of bitcoin would be higher without it.

[peter0425]

Bitcoincash has had a good price increase recently,although dropped by double digits today, so there must be a good core of investors interested in this coin.

The good core of investors you are saying doesn't care if they have big blocks and faster transactions. Bitcoin Cash will remain as another altcoin , thus it is simply for pump-and-dump scheme. And they didn't get enough support from the community because we all know the personality behind it are nothing but to hype the coin to their advantage.

Yes its a poor idea because we only already have Bitcoin, although scaling issues has been the number problem, there's been a least a moved to try and make a solution, like Segwit and LN.

[darkangel11]

Bitcoincash has had a good price increase recently,although dropped by double digits today, so there must be a good core of investors interested in this coin.

Rather speculators, not investors. BCH is viewed as the alternative to BTC, but for that alternative to achieve anything BTC has to die first. I'll say it again, BCH is not a competition. It's too shitty, it will never take over just because people like the name or they like Roger Ver (that's even less likely, nobody likes Roger )
BTC is the mainstream cryptocurrency and by the time people get bored with it or something much better comes out BCH will be old and rusty.

[FrueGreads]

I share your thoughts on bitcoin cash, and I also think it's a very bad idea because of centralization issues, that will occur inevitably. I didn't understand what your were saying about fliptopay. Would that site work almost like a bank? You transfer coins there, and then you use them. I think this ruins the hole purpose of crypto, that is to eliminate the middle man, and let you control your own money in a decentralized way.

Also what do you mean by this:

I would actually like to see a coin that ends mining rewards and cuts the block size by 90%. To make the coin more like Island of Yap stone money where transactions are rare.  Where people are not digging gold out of one hole and putting it in another hole the bank vault.  Where the average person makes one transaction per year.

This looks like a coin only used like gold. People would keep it, and not spend it, but I would like to use crypto as a currency, and not just for holding.

[Hydrogen]

Speaking of bitcoin cash. I saw this posted on twitter a few days ago.  



Image link: https://i.imgur.com/Q639aTC.jpg

Source: https://twitter.com/Ragnarly/status/988535641070751744

(Its a screencap of bitcoin.com which is owned by Roger Ver, the man behind bitcoin cash. Here it falsely claims BCH is the real bitcoin.)

It might be fair to say bitcoin cash is a bit on the shady side.

If BCH is going to become centralized, why not just use a fee-less centralized system with off-chain transactions.  https://www.fliptopay.com/ . I noticed this site.  Basically you transfer bitcoin to a centralized wallet.  From there you have virtual bitcoin and can convert to USD or Euros.  There you can use the currency at any android pay store.  Note this is not fee-less, but it easily could have been.  blockchain.info wallet is basically off-chain.  All transactions on these type of sites, between its users and stores, are off-chain, and take zero space or fees on the chain.  Yet they work instantaneously.

Bolded: exactly. Many blockchain related proposals are attempts to re-create fiat money and other institutions inside of a heavily centralized paradigm. They may not be in the same category as bitcoin or crypto currencies as they are more similar to traditional banking and methods. Bitcoin is more decentralized and has differing methodologies behind it which are the inverse opposite to the mentality of people who operate things like bitcoin cash. There should be better terminology to describe distinctions made between the two.

I wouldn't mind it if people noticed there are a large number of fake sockpuppet accounts in favor of things like bitcoin cash also.

[andrei56]

The main idea behind BCH is that they are going to allow as many transactions as possible to allow micro-transactions to take place for a low fee.   They use ideas like Moores Law that says hard disk space can increase to cover all transactions forever (although there is no proof). The coin will become centralized over time possibly running on maybe 1000 servers or less.  

The reason why it is a poor idea is it will become too costly to do spinoffs.  Bitcoin has already had 2 code changing ideas, the lightning network and  segwit.  Imagine over time, leaders of BCH are going to come up with more ideas.  But, unlike spinoffs, you are going to be locked into the BCH system because it will be too costly and complicated to move.

This may turn out to be true, but from an economic perspective, surely it's still better for them to try it out and then know for sure, rather than just making an assumption?  If it transpires that on-chain scaling isn't viable due to centralisation, at least we'll then have the evidence to demonstrate it as fact.  In this regard, I tend to view BCH as a "testnet-after-the-fact".  More of a "what if" than an actual contender for market dominance.  

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "spinoffs", but it doesn't look as though they're having trouble making changes to the BCH codebase, as they're about to increase their maximum blocksize again, currently scheduled for 15th May 2018.  The lack of SegWit and Lightning in BCH isn't due to cost or complication, it's more of an ideological difference.  BCH supporters simply don't approve of those particular ideas.  They forked away because they have a different vision of how this should work.  If it does emerge their economic vision proves to be a mistake, it's their loss.  Either way, it's all useful (and interesting) data.  

I agree with this even if I do not like bitcoin cash and I think the core developers are right in their vision anyone has the right to fork the code and make changes to bitcoin if they think that is going to improve the network, then all becomes a matter of which one is the superior product if the ones that created bitcoin cash are right we will find out in the next 5 or 10 years maybe less, but if the core developers are right we will find out in the same amount of time, either way we win since we get a stronger bitcoin as a result.

[Hydrogen]

Speaking of bitcoin cash (BCH) and Roger Ver, looks as if they both could be in hot water.   

Bitcoin.com & CEO Roger Ver To Face Lawsuit As 800+ Bitcoin Users Unite

Over 800 individuals have come together to create a community against Bitcoin.com and its CEO Roger Ver. A legal action has been pursued by the “Bitcoin.com lawsuit/victims” Telegram group for misleading the users into buying BCH instead of BTC.

Roger Ver in trouble over tricking people into buying BCH

Bitcoin is the most popular and valued virtual currency in the crypto space. And anyone that wants to know about it, is likely to go the Bitcoin.com route. It’s only instinctual that bitcoin enthusiasts would try this domain. But when one Google “buy bitcoin”, the first result you get is buy.bitcoin.com. 

Now, the CEO of Bitcoin.com Roger Ver who is an early Bitcoin investor might soon face a lawsuit for his controversial promotion of Bitcoin Cash. It is gaining a lot of steam in a Telegram group chart named Bitcoin.com lawsuit/victims created by a user, Money Trigz. The group has already crossed 800 members that want to press charges on the website for spreading wrong information that Bitcoin cash is the real Bitcoin.

Apparently, the group has attracted some big names from the crypto community as well though no one is in charge of this initiative.

Roger Ver, who has been a Bitcoin influencer, started propagating Bitcoin Cash after the fork of Bitcoin. His website bitcoin.com shows users Bitcoin Cash at the top and represents Bitcoin as Bitcoin Core. Not only the logos are similar but this is the only website that refers to Bitcoin as Bitcoin Core. The misinformation led users to end up buying Bitcoin Cash when they wanted to buy Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin community has been angered by this and wants to boycott the website. Meanwhile, Erik Voorhees, the CEO of Shapeshift and longtime associate of Roger Ver distanced himself from Ver regarding representing Bitcoin Cash as the real Bitcoin as tweeted by him:

“Roger – please stop referencing me to back up your opinion that Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin. It isn’t. Bitcoin is the chain originating from the genesis block with the highest accumulated proof of work. The Bitcoin Cash fork failed to gain majority, thus it is not Bitcoin.”

Bitcoin users/enthusiasts seeking legal route

The community is taking it seriously as many bitcoin enthusiasts are even a ready to donate to the lawsuit. Regarding this lawsuit, Money Trigz stated:

“Everybody is frustrated and outraged plus you have victims now losing money because of it. [Bitcoin.com] crossed the line, and we’re pushing back legally.”

The creator of the group emphasized that instead of a discussion group, it is for the victims:

“The legal angles are being discussed with lawyers, not up for discussion here, this is public, [Bitcoin.com] have eyes here.”

He further said that:

“We have things going on behind the scenes and ALLOT of industry people dm us to help with lawyer firms recommendations and in different juri’s. there seems to be some serious merrit with a few of the approaches, can’t say more now. send everybody to us that lost money using bitcoin.com platform or wallet.”

Do you think Roger Ver and Bitcoin.com are committing fraud? Share your thoughts with us in the comment section below!

https://coingape.com/bitcoin-com-ceo-roger-ver-to-face-lawsuit/

Specifics on how bitcoin.com could be misleading or defrauding the public into buying bitcoin cash (bch) as they are unaware of which bitcoin is the legitimate one:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3419499.msg35755094#msg35755094

Uncertain on what the 800+ bitcoin users chances are for a successful lawsuit against Roger Ver or bitcoin cash. I remember a lot of people on this forum saying facebook and google were correct to ban bitcoin advertisements considering many of them were for fraudulent ICO's or scams. Would be interested to know if those same individuals believe Roger Ver, bitcoin.com or bitcoin cash should be penalized for misleading people who want to buy bitcoin into purchasing bitcoin cash instead.

How do people feel about this?

[DooMAD]

Would be interested to know if those same individuals believe Roger Ver, bitcoin.com or bitcoin cash should be penalized for misleading people who want to buy bitcoin into purchasing bitcoin cash instead.

How do people feel about this?

If they simply stated it was their opinion or belief that BCH is ideologically closer to the Bitcoin whitepaper, I'd be okay with that.  They're free to express opinions and beliefs, while others are free to disagree with them.  They're perfectly entitled to compete for market share.  But saying that BCH is Bitcoin is clearly misleading.  As the article states, they have neither the proof of work nor the economic majority behind them, so they're empirically not Bitcoin.  The only reason they have a longer chain is because they implemented the emergency difficulty adjustments, but that doesn't equate to having accumulated more proof of work.

In terms of penalties, though, it's a tricky one.  Ver legally resides in Japan, bitcoin.com is registered in the Caribbean, BCH itself has no central location where one country can claim legal jurisdiction.  Who applies the penalty to who/what?  Should anyone even be attempting to enforce laws in an area where it's often considered favourable to be unregulated?  What legal precedents would it set which could potentially bite us later?  Some of the people in the thread you linked are calling for Ver to lose ownership if the bitcoin.com domain, but that sounds distinctly antithetical to the concepts of ownership which are generally enshrined in crypto's fundamental ethos, so I wouldn't agree with that.  Disagreeing with someone doesn't give you entitlement to take their property away.

[deisik]

...

Just a rant and didn't know where to put it (other than my nose).

All these wannabe Bitcoins are copycats, which aim at earning profits by their creators. But this should have been expected just as with altcoins starting to spring up a few years ago en masse. In essence, it was only a matter of time until someone made another Bitcoin instead of creating an altcoin based on Bitcoin codebase and protocol. I suspect (actually, hope) these copycats (well, most of them) will die long before physical limitations such as disk capacities kick in. They are not intended to be a genuine means of making transactions (whatever their creators claim to the contrary). They are no more than profit-making machines exploiting Bitcoin's name while it is still worth something

In short, expect more to come

[peter0425]

...

Just a rant and didn't know where to put it (other than my nose).

All these wannabe Bitcoins are copycats, which aim at earning profits by their creators. But this should have been expected just as with altcoins starting to spring up a few years ago en masse. In essence, it was only a matter of time until someone made another Bitcoin instead of creating an altcoin based on Bitcoin codebase and protocol. I suspect these copycats (well, most of them) will die long before physical limitations such as disk capacities kick in. They are not intented to be a genuine means of making transactions (whatever their creators claim to the contrary). They are no more than profit-making machines exploiting Bitcoin's name while it is still worth something

In short, expect more to come

So true. Those investors who smells them from afar already made such decision not to engaged themselves with Bitcoin Cash because the people behind are the one who will eventually taking all the profits. We have seen their attempts to create FUD and to promote as if they are the real 'bitcoin' in November. However, as much as how many paid schills here in the forum to spread false rumors, they didn't succeed and have no traction from the community because we all know what their real intentions of having a fork.

[no0dlepunk]

Bitcoincash has had a good price increase recently,although dropped by double digits today, so there must be a good core of investors interested in this coin.

Exactly. I don't understand why they keep criticising BCH yet the price keeps going up. These haters will soon suffocate on their hatred. I wish it was airdrop rather than a fork so I had more free BCH to myself.

They do because they have sold their BCH long time ago probably @ it's $150ish. Right now they have the FOMO because they have already experienced how BCH could badly hurt BTC (remember that November 2017 shit). I have learned my lesson the hard way... right now i don't give a damn whether it's bitcoin or BCH will be king forever. I am HODLing both. ha ha!

[Jonsnowstark]

Speaking of bitcoin cash (BCH) and Roger Ver, looks as if they both could be in hot water.   

Bitcoin.com & CEO Roger Ver To Face Lawsuit As 800+ Bitcoin Users Unite

Over 800 individuals have come together to create a community against Bitcoin.com and its CEO Roger Ver. A legal action has been pursued by the “Bitcoin.com lawsuit/victims” Telegram group for misleading the users into buying BCH instead of BTC.

Roger Ver in trouble over tricking people into buying BCH

Bitcoin is the most popular and valued virtual currency in the crypto space. And anyone that wants to know about it, is likely to go the Bitcoin.com route. It’s only instinctual that bitcoin enthusiasts would try this domain. But when one Google “buy bitcoin”, the first result you get is buy.bitcoin.com. 

Now, the CEO of Bitcoin.com Roger Ver who is an early Bitcoin investor might soon face a lawsuit for his controversial promotion of Bitcoin Cash. It is gaining a lot of steam in a Telegram group chart named Bitcoin.com lawsuit/victims created by a user, Money Trigz. The group has already crossed 800 members that want to press charges on the website for spreading wrong information that Bitcoin cash is the real Bitcoin.

Apparently, the group has attracted some big names from the crypto community as well though no one is in charge of this initiative.

Roger Ver, who has been a Bitcoin influencer, started propagating Bitcoin Cash after the fork of Bitcoin. His website bitcoin.com shows users Bitcoin Cash at the top and represents Bitcoin as Bitcoin Core. Not only the logos are similar but this is the only website that refers to Bitcoin as Bitcoin Core. The misinformation led users to end up buying Bitcoin Cash when they wanted to buy Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin community has been angered by this and wants to boycott the website. Meanwhile, Erik Voorhees, the CEO of Shapeshift and longtime associate of Roger Ver distanced himself from Ver regarding representing Bitcoin Cash as the real Bitcoin as tweeted by him:

“Roger – please stop referencing me to back up your opinion that Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin. It isn’t. Bitcoin is the chain originating from the genesis block with the highest accumulated proof of work. The Bitcoin Cash fork failed to gain majority, thus it is not Bitcoin.”

Bitcoin users/enthusiasts seeking legal route

The community is taking it seriously as many bitcoin enthusiasts are even a ready to donate to the lawsuit. Regarding this lawsuit, Money Trigz stated:

“Everybody is frustrated and outraged plus you have victims now losing money because of it. [Bitcoin.com] crossed the line, and we’re pushing back legally.”

The creator of the group emphasized that instead of a discussion group, it is for the victims:

“The legal angles are being discussed with lawyers, not up for discussion here, this is public, [Bitcoin.com] have eyes here.”

He further said that:

“We have things going on behind the scenes and ALLOT of industry people dm us to help with lawyer firms recommendations and in different juri’s. there seems to be some serious merrit with a few of the approaches, can’t say more now. send everybody to us that lost money using bitcoin.com platform or wallet.”

Do you think Roger Ver and Bitcoin.com are committing fraud? Share your thoughts with us in the comment section below!

https://coingape.com/bitcoin-com-ceo-roger-ver-to-face-lawsuit/

Specifics on how bitcoin.com could be misleading or defrauding the public into buying bitcoin cash (bch) as they are unaware of which bitcoin is the legitimate one:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3419499.msg35755094#msg35755094

Uncertain on what the 800+ bitcoin users chances are for a successful lawsuit against Roger Ver or bitcoin cash. I remember a lot of people on this forum saying facebook and google were correct to ban bitcoin advertisements considering many of them were for fraudulent ICO's or scams. Would be interested to know if those same individuals believe Roger Ver, bitcoin.com or bitcoin cash should be penalized for misleading people who want to buy bitcoin into purchasing bitcoin cash instead.

How do people feel about this?

People who speak bad about bch thinks bch is attacking bitcoin. Well what they did actually, they attempted to beat bitcoin that time they went second and overtook ethereum but then failed to do so. Bch is very agressive in promoting their coin and maybe used the advantage of naming itself closer to bitcoin to be easily mistaken as bitcoin.  Roger Ver is attempting towoe people into buying bch when all they really want is to buy bitcoin.

[LtMotioN]

I agree with this even if I do not like bitcoin cash and I think the core developers are right in their vision anyone has the right to fork the code and make changes to bitcoin if they think that is going to improve the network, then all becomes a matter of which one is the superior product if the ones that created bitcoin cash are right we will find out in the next 5 or 10 years maybe less, but if the core developers are right we will find out in the same amount of time, either way we win since we get a stronger bitcoin as a result.

I sort of stand in the same boat, BCH is a good experiment and it is good to have another roadmap going for cryptocurrency as a whole. Whichever option is the best solution will exist to keep dominating in years to come.
Personally I wish we just went with the Segwit2x fork and everybody agreed on it. This kind of infighting and bad press is terrible for us as a community and it has to end.

The issue with bcash is the main promoters behind it, whom are always on the offensive and misleading people. You do not see any other altcoin marketing themselves by trying to hog the name of bitcoin and insulting the people whose code they copy pasted, or twisting facts to suit their narrative.  You never see anyone coming out and saying "I am the CEO of bitcoin cash".
If it wasn't for all this controversy I think BCH would have had a much more dominant position in the market. Ironically the people who are promoting it killed it.

And I do hope the newbies win their court case against bitcoin.com. Those links on their site is clearly and intentionally misleading.

[miroslavt]

Even then if you see the recent growth, it has left many strong coins way behind. I think it has almost doubled in last one month only and still going strong.