Thoughts on the Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash Dilemia

[Intrepid-Ventures]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

[1715570003]

1715570003

[1715570003]

1715570003

[1715570003]

1715570003

[TepungBeras]

I prefer the idea of bitcoin, I am sure that bitcoin will be able to achieve what the main goal by becoming the currency of the future.

[bitmover]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

I think the main  problem is that Bcash is spreading misinformation.
Like Bitcoin.com where he tries to cheat users into buying bcash as if it were btc

The whole publicity with slugs "the real btc" or "true Satoshi vision" are misleading. I think that attitude can hurt the market because it harms people, trying to fool people into buying bcash as of it were btc.

[mk4]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

I think the main  problem is that Bcash is spreading misinformation.
Like Bitcoin.com where he tries to cheat users into buying bcash as if it were btc

The whole publicity with slugs "the real btc" or "true Satoshi vision" are misleading. I think that attitude can hurt the market because it harms people, trying to fool people into buying bcash as of it were btc.

This. Some people actually bought BCH instead of BTC as Bitcoin was listed as BCH and BTC was listed as Bitcoin Core on bitcoin.com

I mean, I'm fine with creating forks. In a decentralized ecosystem, disagreements are to be really expected. But stuff like this as done by Roger Ver? Nope. Linux Mint forked Ubuntu Linux, but the Linux Mint community isn't spreading misinformation that "Linux Mint is the real Ubuntu" or something.

[Tankdestroyer]

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

Do not care about them since Roger Ver's group are just a bunch of whales who wants more money, nothing more. They might hurt the overall market of bitcoin now(because of the bitcoin.com problem which is indicated on this thread but they can't do it for a long time, the misunderstanding will be cleared soon. I feel sorry for the newbies who will buy bch at bitcoin's current price though, they will only be used by Roger Ver's team to get BCH prices soar high.

[CryptoBry]

In my own opinion, there is nothing wrong if Roger Ver is having his own cryptocurrency and is promoting it with all of his vigor and might. What is wrong is that he is trying to destroy Bitcoin so that Bitcoin Cash can be elevated to the same level which Bitcoin is still enjoying. Can he not do his own thing without destroying the thing that he also partly built? The market of cryptocurrency is expanding and there will always be space for a project like Bitcoin Cash so there is no use displaying predatory kind of behavior. The bottomline is that whether we like or not what can happen to Bitcoin will be affecting all of the cryptocurrency market. The more that the guy is displaying his unprofessionalism the more am convinced that he is becoming ungrateful.

[Intrepid-Ventures]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

I think the main  problem is that Bcash is spreading misinformation.
Like Bitcoin.com where he tries to cheat users into buying bcash as if it were btc

The whole publicity with slugs "the real btc" or "true Satoshi vision" are misleading. I think that attitude can hurt the market because it harms people, trying to fool people into buying bcash as of it were btc.

I agree, fighting over what is the 'real bitcoin' causes confusion, especially with new players entering the market. Couldn't agree with you more. Due diligence is crucial for any speculative market.

[Tactical Genius]

I think the fundamental problem has been with Roger Ver making bitcoin cash look like the original bitcoin and his sites misleading newbies into buying BCH instead of BTC otherwise the competition would have just been as health as ETH and ETC.In any case,i believe bitcoin is the currency of choice now over BCH.the unfortunate part is that there is no satoshi nakomoto to fight an open fight for bitcoin against BCH.

[Crown1]

Most of the time, people pay more attention to which tokens can benefit them.
So there's no need for this discussion.

[yojodojo21]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

it doesn't matter at all when they try to market BCH as Bitcoin, they will also get affected when bitcoin price decrease also altcoin will follow, and it is not the problem of bitcoin, base on the information above my post that there is some litte trick about mislead information about split coin of bitcoin which is BCH, but it's not the real problem tho. the problem is within the buyers, they must know how to distinguish the real one (king) rather than BCH.

[Herbert2020]

the attack on bitcoin is not something that just stops over night and goes away.
people like Roger Ver will always try to take over bitcoin and do it for their own benefits to become richer. they don't even care about the future of it, they may as well make millions of dollars in one day and then kill the whole thing off.

[Msile]

Improving cryptocurrency as a transaction medium will depend on maintaining the high level of security that Bitcoin has always ensured, while also improving transaction speeds. Bitcoin will continue to be highly secure, but how much its transaction speeds will improve is unclear. Bitcoin Cash, once its difficulty has adjusted, could have transactions processing in two minutes and 30 seconds. The security of the Bitcoin Cash blockchain, though, is unclear.

[-Sinner-]

What dilemma? Bitcoin cash is like a clown right now, so what's the doubt? Honestly talking, I'm thinking also litecoin is becoming useless, you can imagine bcash.. No sense to exists!

[Maestro75]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

Here at bitcointalk we believe that every news source should have a link. Where is the link to this Roger Ver attempting to hurt the market perspective you have shared here. Or are you speculating and spreading fud?

[bitmover]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

I think the main  problem is that Bcash is spreading misinformation.
Like Bitcoin.com where he tries to cheat users into buying bcash as if it were btc

The whole publicity with slugs "the real btc" or "true Satoshi vision" are misleading. I think that attitude can hurt the market because it harms people, trying to fool people into buying bcash as of it were btc.

This. Some people actually bought BCH instead of BTC as Bitcoin was listed as BCH and BTC was listed as Bitcoin Core on bitcoin.com

I mean, I'm fine with creating forks. In a decentralized ecosystem, disagreements are to be really expected. But stuff like this as done by Roger Ver? Nope. Linux Mint forked Ubuntu Linux, but the Linux Mint community isn't spreading misinformation that "Linux Mint is the real Ubuntu" or something.

Yeah this is bad especially for newcomers, who will find it a lot confusing and may be scammed into buying bch..

I think bch won't last long, lightning and segwit are real

[BelieveInBTC]

Bitcoin Cash causes a lot of mess because new people are confused which Bitcoin is the "real" one. Bitcoin.com has been misleading their customers by calling Bitcoin Cash Bitcoin. It looks like they are really desperate to gain more users than Bitcoin which was not possible even after many pumps on Bitcoin Cash and spam attacks on Bitcoin. It's been almost 1 year since Bcash was created and it's getting wrose and woerse with every month.

[dado7]

Bitcoin is pushing hard with SegWit, Lightning network, smart contracts implementation. The community is backing it up 100%
I never saw any purpose in Bitcoin Cash, except speculative. Maybe somebody can try to change my mind?

[franky1]

bitcoin is owned by no one

bitcoin.com talks about cash
bitcoin.org talks about core

both sides need to clarify that they are
bitcoin core
bitcoin cash

much like the analogy of "dollar"
america talks about U.S dollar
australia talks about A.U dollar

both sides need to clarify that they are
U.S dollar
A.U dollar

again no one should own "bitcoin"
if you are going to rebut to say that the network with the core rules, the core bips, the core roadmap, and the team that have paid devs from blockstream who are also making segwit and lightning.. should be and own bitcoin.. then you have said goodbye to decentralisation.

which is what they want. they want decentralisation to die and to only have distribution (their buzzword: distributed ledger technology (DLT))

so any argument you can have against ver also applies to theymos (both promote a team as being "the bitcoin")
so any argument you can have against jgarzic also applies to PWuille(both coded a node that maintains the rules and introduces new rules)
any argument you have against craig wright also applies to adam back (both falsely proclaim they invented bitcoin but neither coded anything in 2008-2009)

because if you take a few steps back.. you will realise the whole bilateral split event was designed to fake democracy, purely to activate a bip that had 35% vote. by distracting the opposition into another coin which. in actual fact is maintained, created and activated by the same group funding the core team.

so by saying X deserves it or Y deserves it. is the same as saying "someone" deserves it.
NO ONE DESERVES IT.

the bilateral split was not just a random altcoin event. it was a bi-directional split of equal direction change. both sides became an alt that is now different to the old chain. no side has claim over being the one and only.

if you intend to play the game that if someone hates core they must love cash.. is just playing th sheep game of fake choice.
look beyond the tactics of the only choice being team A or team B and bickering over which..

bitcoin should be ownd by no teams and so no one should defend core and no one should defend cash
.
now take a few steps back,, take off any team defense caps off.. take a few deep breaths and think about decentralised bitcoin.

[Wind_FURY]

I already replied to you in the other thread. But seeing this post, I cannot help myself. Hahaha.

I will post again here for everyone to see both sides of the debate.

bitcoin is owned by no one

bitcoin.com talks about cash
bitcoin.org talks about core

both sides need to clarify that they are
bitcoin core
bitcoin cash

I agree that no one owns the word "Bitcoin", that is why Bitcoin Cash can call itself "Bitcoin Cash". But that is not the problem. The problem is Roger Ver trying to confuse everyone that Bitcoin Cash is the real "Bitcoin". What if a newbie buys BCH and think he bought Bitcoin?

much like the analogy of "dollar"
america talks about U.S dollar
australia talks about A.U dollar

both sides need to clarify that they are
U.S dollar
A.U dollar

I appreciate that argument and I agree up to a point. But I believe your problem really is when people say Bitcoin, they are really referring it to what you call "Bitcoin Core".

Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core. The coin traded as BTC in the exchanges priced on $9300 at this minute, not BCH.

again no one should own "bitcoin"

No one said it should.

if you are going to rebut to say that the network with the core rules, the core bips, the core roadmap, and the team that have paid devs from blockstream who are also making segwit and lightning.. should be and own bitcoin.. then you have said goodbye to decentralisation.

which is what they want. they want decentralisation to die and to only have distribution (their buzzword: distributed ledger technology (DLT))

Bitcoin is decentralized. "Bitcoin Core" is only one implementation of Bitcoin that did not break from the consensus rules, https://coin.dance/nodes

Everyone is free to make their own implementation and follow the consensus rules to be compatible with Bitcoin.

so any argument you can have against ver also applies to theymos (both promote a team as being "the bitcoin")
so any argument you can have against jgarzic also applies to PWuille(both coded a node that maintains the rules and introduces new rules)
any argument you have against craig wright also applies to adam back (both falsely proclaim they invented bitcoin but neither coded anything in 2008-2009)

It depends on the argument. The argument is not only about the name.

because if you take a few steps back.. you will realise the whole bilateral split event was designed to fake democracy, purely to activate a bip that had 35% vote. by distracting the opposition into another coin which. in actual fact is maintained, created and activated by the same group funding the core team.

There was no bilateral split. It was Bitcoin Cash that changed the consensus rules and split.

Plus the story about Segwit's activation deserves to be in another topic. Jihan Wu, with the help of the Chinese mining cartel stalled Segwit because it was incompatible with AsicBoost.

But it was activated by the same miners that have stalled it.

so by saying X deserves it or Y deserves it. is the same as saying "someone" deserves it.
NO ONE DESERVES IT.

the bilateral split was not just a random altcoin event. it was a bi-directional split of equal direction change. both sides became an alt that is now different to the old chain. no side has claim over being the one and only.

if you intend to play the game that if someone hates core they must love cash.. is just playing th sheep game of fake choice.
look beyond the tactics of the only choice being team A or team B and bickering over which..

bitcoin should be ownd by no teams and so no one should defend core and no one should defend cash
.
now take a few steps back,, take off any team defense caps off.. take a few deep breaths and think about decentralised bitcoin.

You can repeat this in all of the threads in the forum but it was Bitcoin Cash that split from the main chain because it changed the consensus rules and made an altcoin incompatible with Bitcoin's consensus rules.

[Meraki]

I prefer bitcoin over bitcoin cash, BCH is just a fork coin of bitcoin so it has no chance to dethrone the original, only the chinese and the koreans supports bitcoin cash meanwhile bitcoin is supported wholewide so bitcoin is still the best.

[Wind_FURY]

I prefer bitcoin over bitcoin cash, BCH is just a fork coin of bitcoin so it has no chance to dethrone the original, only the chinese and the koreans supports bitcoin cash meanwhile bitcoin is supported wholewide so bitcoin is still the best.

But what is "dethrone" for you? Is it the market cap? Will your preference for Bitcoin change if another altcoin replaced Bitcoin as the most valued coin in all of the "blockchain world".

I believe Bitcoin will still be king because it has the most work expended on it, it has the most community support, the best developers and the most secure cryptocurrency.

[franky1]

I agree that no one owns the word "Bitcoin",
.......
....
.....
Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core.

here is your mindset problem.
you keep thinking the network maintained by core, which has to strictly follow cores BIP process and submit new features only via cores github.. is "bitcoin"

both core and cash do not own bitcoin
both sides (bitcoin.org and bitcoin.com) need to clarify that they are
bitcoin core
bitcoin cash

dont you get it yet

and bitcoin core DID break from the consensus rules.. segwit is a consensus rule break. hense why from november 2016-summer 2017 they only had 35% consensus vote and thus segwit would not have got activated as it would caused issues to the network at 35%

thats why they got bloq to make cash. to get rid of the 65% opposers. so that segwit could fake a 95% vote to activate segwit

dont you get it yet

bloq and core are partners in crime. the bilateral split was a bi-directional (2 altcoin) event that both are different codebases,, address types, network topology compared to bitcoin 2009-2013

and if you still think cores network is decentralised and open. i dare you to make a node that wishes to use in-network consensus feature satoshi built to have a new feature that opposes CORES roadmap. .. and just se how fast your node gets ban-hammered, REKT, propagandised as an attack. as oppose to a fair decentralised challenge to a network upgrade.

[J Sykes]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

I agree. I don't think there is any issue with forking the network. This is common practice. But theft of the brand and defamation is another story!

[Xester]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

Bitcoin cash is actually a good cryptocurrency and it has good features. Bitcoin cash was made without the basic flaws and problems in bitcoin algorithms. But even though this is a well made coin but the problem comes from the management of BCH especially Roger Ver. Due to their scamming methods of getting more buyers they camouflaged as the real bitcoin site using bitcoin.com as the name of their website. Due to this bad moves of Roger Ver bitcoin cash was being affected.

[Binugon]

There are so many misconceptions and views about Bitcoin. Bitcoin is definitely not a currency that will replace a country's currency. Bitcoin is also definitely not a business that promises a daily profit of a few percent

[RavagedLife]

I don't think Bitcoin Cash will be able to bigger profitable then Bitcoin. I always prefer bitcoin, because Bitcoin Cash is a part of Bitcoin. So I can say Bit coin is father of all cryptocurrency not only Bitcoin Cash.

[Dexion]

in my opinion, both have no big problems, the difference between them will not affect the market.

both have different qualities and quantities. bitcoin more dominates the market and the crypto world, BCH is just a fraction of bitcoin. so BCH is helpless.

BCH will not be a bitcoin in the future, because BCH does not have good selling power in the market, even BCH spreading is very slow.

[Dico88]

At the time of launching bitcoin cash where bitcoin prices dropped dramatically because of the stronghold of both sides. Digital currency as a transaction medium will depend on the high security level always guaranteed by bitcoin and increase the speed in the transaction. Bitcoin will be safe and how fast the transaction speed will increase is not clear. But bitcoin cash difficulties in the transaction process for 2 minutes 30 seconds.

[eashikde]

This is a very bad practice ... after such a deception, people with an adherence will work with cryptocurrency or negatively speaks for potential investors. I hope to make up my mind and few have suffered.

[Vertex_ICO]

It is a heated topic definitely, but I am going with the old faithful BTC!

[cryptodreem]

i think whatever is happening it is engaging people into crypto world some may support bitcoin, some may BCH. best part to me is people are coming towards cryptos. and only this will help to sprade the market all over the world.

[Wind_FURY]

I agree that no one owns the word "Bitcoin",
.......
....
.....
Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core.

here is your mindset problem.
you keep thinking the network maintained by core, which has to strictly follow cores BIP process and submit new features only via cores github.. is "bitcoin"

This is not about that. This is about Roger Ver saying "Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin" and hilarity ensues. It is not my problem that when people says Bitcoin they really mean the cryptocurrency you call "Bitcoin Core".

That topic is another topic and should be in its own thread. Do not worry, I will research and inquire about that.

both core and cash do not own bitcoin
both sides (bitcoin.org and bitcoin.com) need to clarify that they are
bitcoin core
bitcoin cash

You can clarify if you want, no one is stopping you. But if you say "Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin", do not blame me if they call you out and laugh at you. When people say Bitcoin it means the real Bitcoin, the cryptocurrency you call "Bitcoin Core".

dont you get it yet

I do get it. But that does not mean I agree with your "get it".

and bitcoin core DID break from the consensus rules.. segwit is a consensus rule break. hense why from november 2016-summer 2017 they only had 35% consensus vote and thus segwit would not have got activated as it would caused issues to the network at 35%

Segwit is backwards compatible with the old consensus rules it did not break anything.

Plus the reason why Segwit only had 35% consensus was because Jihan Wu, who produces 70% if Bitcoin miners was trying to block it because it was not compatible with AsicBoost.

thats why they got bloq to make cash. to get rid of the 65% opposers. so that segwit could fake a 95% vote to activate segwit

Really? Hahahaha.

dont you get it yet

bloq and core are partners in crime. the bilateral split was a bi-directional (2 altcoin) event that both are different codebases,, address types, network topology compared to bitcoin 2009-2013

Until I get some more research about this and know what really happened, I will put my tin foil hat on.

and if you still think cores network is decentralised and open. i dare you to make a node that wishes to use in-network consensus feature satoshi built to have a new feature that opposes CORES roadmap.

Does the direction of the network has to be what Satoshi wants? I thought it was supposed to be decentralized.

Plus it is decentralized. Look at it, it can hard fork away to as many Bitcoin versions you want. I do not have problems with Bitcoin Cash splitting off from the main chain to have bigger blocks. I was hoping that would be a success so we can live in harmony. But clearly there might be some problems. Hahahaha.

.. and just se how fast your node gets ban-hammered, REKT, propagandised as an attack. as oppose to a fair decentralised challenge to a network upgrade.

Because it can be. But do not worry. I will ask achow about this and see if you are not bullshitting again as someone said to me in private.

I told him I would still be giving you the benefit of the doubt though.

I like people who are passionate in their beliefs and have respect for them.

[Svafnir74]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

I think that there is only one bitcoin - this is BTC. I do not recognize the fork of bitcoin. But at the same time I think that BTH or other forks can not harm bitcoin. I think that all of them will eventually disappear and will remain one BTC.

[cryptojohnn7]

Many people think that BTC and BCH are kind of similar when we see the name. Misinformation or not, I personally think no one should buy a coin without checking whereabouts. We should not be confused about what we are buying. It would be better if there was no split in Blockchain, but I don’t think it should affect the market much.

[iram3130]

IMO, BitcoinCash is spreading like a wildfire and payment processors are adding it everywhere. The team supporting BCH is strong and created havoc in the market many times before. Still lots of support needed to even compete with Bitcoin but yes it may happen in the future.

[jasonhart]

It is a nice topic i think. I prefer bitcoin more than any other cryptos. Just because it is still leading the market. However, people have to move to that which makes more profit.

[kevinpeck]

With my point of view bitcoin cash is creating the problem by disseminating inaccurate information. Where they are trying to cheat the users as for example bitcoin.com through buying bitcoin cash as if it is bitcoin. I think this is not the right attitude towards this should be stopped because it harms people.

[Jonsnowstark]

Well bitcoin.com and roger ver has made it seem like bch is bitcoin and they termed the real bitcoin as bitcoin core. This was even suggested to be published in coinmarketcap but they refuse to do so. I don't know how its supposed to look like for already existing investors. But really, for the new investors, it would really seem like deceiving to coin bch as bitcoin.

[xuan87]

Yeah, when bch was introduced there are a lot of opinions that occurred, some believe bch destroy BTC and some believe bch is the next BTC, for me bch is destroying BTC, it make people confused when they want to invest, because a forking coin doesn't got a good impression for the investors, but since anyone can create their own coin so I don't blame people to try to create bch to take advantage, so for me even it's destroying Bitcoin but it's a fair competition, but somehow I don't see any good future in bch

[franky1]

Segwit is backwards compatible with the old consensus rules it did not break anything.

segwit is not backward compatible
segwit tx's is set to be (ELI-5) invisible/ (ELI-15) not validatable by old consensus.
if you looked into it you will see terms such as what gmax named "upstream" filter nodes and LukJR calls "bridges" which is where if a old client just connects to the network and received the current block data the same way a segwit node does. it wont be understood.
a segwit node has to act as a translater and convert the chain of 2017+ into a different format specifically for the requesting node.
https://bitcoincore.org/assets/images/filtering-by-upgraded-node.svg



in short. if segwit nodes had a bug. you cannot just manually copy and paste the blockchain data from a folder to another folder for an old client and carry on. its all completely different.
so with all currnt nodes being strict core2017+ policy/rule following nodes. if core nodes did bug out they cant just downgrade to an earlier version. because the data would not have a translater.. (the translator has the flu)
EG. the 2013 levelDB event would have crashed the network if people were not able to just downgrade without a translator required.
back then they didnt need a translater so downgrading was simple.. now thats not the case. and makes the network more fragile to bug attack of a client running exact same ruleset and codebase

even the guidelines on upgrading to segwit say. if you want to run an old node, due to the network not wanting to act as translators for old clients(ban-hammer) you would personally need to download a segwit client. and white list yor old node to get accepted and then let your segwit client translate data for the old client. where by your old client treats segwit transactions as not requiring validation (funky tx's)
(image above simplifys the waffle)


imagine a system of checking passports. where in a decentralised world every passport needs checking.
segwit is set to be a diplomatic immunity holder that pretends the block creator validated them and so the decentralised consensus network do not need to check it.

as for the 35% of the community vote.
actually you AGAIN are reading too much reddit propaganda. your nearly at the point of sounding like a scripted sheep. antpool had less power then propagandised. loads of people were screaming "china china china" when there were things like slush pool which was based in thailand. there were other pools in iceland, georgia, and multiple other countries.

even funnier thing.. BTCC was a big lover and advocate of segwit. they even leant one of their spokesmen over to blockstream (mow) to help promote the bilatreal split plan.. and yet ven now BTCC refuses to have confidence to put its block rewards on a segwit(BC1q) address
https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000000b02343a0bd93fda8be0298c1bf16d0b084c1c014d567e  oh look 13TET  .. not bc1q
and if 95% of the community really wanted segwit.. how come only 10% or less is actually using segwit

again you have ignored the whole jgarzig+blockstream stuff.. just to continue the VER WU scripted kardashian distraction drama.
also yea 65% opposed cores roadmap.  core should not have said "attack, lets deport the opposition". but instead compromised. so that it stayed as one network of full community support.

anyway. as for the asic boost drama
that was a whole big laughing comedy. asic boost actually helps. if veryone used it then the network becomes mor secure and hashes blocks faster and with a higher difficulty than a network that does not use it.
but by gmax screaming its a threat. now a pool can use it while the core loyalist rfuse out of loyalty to gmax drama.. and so the ones using it can build blocks faster..
imagine it this way.. GPU mining days. everyone knew ATI was fastr than geforce. but imagine if gmax said ATI is an attack by having a bettr way to hasha block. lets boycott ati.. gmax loyalists would buy geforce and hash at a slower rate. allowing an outsider to come in with an ATI farm and ovr power it..
howevr back then people wer less loyal and more decentralist and so people went for ATI which made the network stronger knowing that a GPU farmer using geforce would have no chance

as to you saying
"Does the direction of the network has to be what Satoshi wants? I thought it was supposed to be decentralized."
firstly its not about satoshi's wants.. he has gone. its about a feature that was built specifically to address issues of a community ivide that if used would not upgrade the network without majority support.. core AVOIDED that mechanism by first throwing out the competition. rathr than finding a majority community agreement (compromise)

as to the freedom to fork off
yea i got no problem with clams(unilateral split), litecoin(zero day fork) which pretty much just grabbed the code and done their own thing on a separate network
but when it comes to the community wanting certain things happening on a certain network. throwing them off the network via double team deception(via bilateral split) so that one team gains the stronghold. and then ringfenses the pools (via Fibre) so no one outside the team can use the same tactic against them. thus turning bitcoin core network into a tyranic monarchy.. is not decentralist practice, not moral, not ethical and goes against the whole point of the world thinking "bitcoin"(2009-2013) was decentralised and uncontrollable.

[franky1]

seems people hate the full truth coming out. so i try to inform on the bigger picture so that people can then make a more informed decision about the dramatised questions of "thoughts on cor vs cash"

because it seems when well informed. these well informed topics die out as it doesnt lead to the answer the topic creator wants. so they and their friends creat another topic of the same question.

much like asking "thoughts on kylie vs khloe kardashian" but hating it when people reveal although ones jenner and ones kardashian.. they are all part of the same family and just want people to fanboy both sides so ultimately the family control the minds of a vast population

[Wind_FURY]

Segwit is backwards compatible with the old consensus rules it did not break anything.

segwit is not backward compatible
segwit tx's is set to be (ELI-5) invisible/ (ELI-15) not validatable by old consensus.
if you looked into it you will see terms such as what gmax named "upstream" filter nodes and LukJR calls "bridges" which is where if a old client just connects to the network and received the current block data the same way a segwit node does. it wont be understood.
a segwit node has to act as a translater and convert the chain of 2017+ into a different format specifically for the requesting node.
https://bitcoincore.org/assets/images/filtering-by-upgraded-node.svg



in short. if segwit nodes had a bug. you cannot just manually copy and paste the blockchain data from a folder to another folder for an old client and carry on. its all completely different.
so with all currnt nodes being strict core2017+ policy/rule following nodes. if core nodes did bug out they cant just downgrade to an earlier version. because the data would not have a translater.. (the translator has the flu)
EG. the 2013 levelDB event would have crashed the network if people were not able to just downgrade without a translator required.
back then they didnt need a translater so downgrading was simple.. now thats not the case. and makes the network more fragile to bug attack of a client running exact same ruleset and codebase

even the guidelines on upgrading to segwit say. if you want to run an old node, due to the network not wanting to act as translators for old clients(ban-hammer) you would personally need to download a segwit client. and white list yor old node to get accepted and then let your segwit client translate data for the old client. where by your old client treats segwit transactions as not requiring validation (funky tx's)
(image above simplifys the waffle)


imagine a system of checking passports. where in a decentralised world every passport needs checking.
segwit is set to be a diplomatic immunity holder that pretends the block creator validated them and so the decentralised consensus network do not need to check it.

I technically suck. I need to verify with the people in the technical discussion area and get back to this. Sorry. But I try. Hahaha.

as for the 35% of the community vote.
actually you AGAIN are reading too much reddit propaganda. your nearly at the point of sounding like a scripted sheep. antpool had less power then propagandised. loads of people were screaming "china china china" when there were things like slush pool which was based in thailand. there were other pools in iceland, georgia, and multiple other countries.

No. Do not attack me for what I read. Attack the propaganda and tell me what you believe it is "propaganda". I am about to say that R is the real propagandist but that would be avoiding the debate.

Stick to the topic.

even funnier thing.. BTCC was a big lover and advocate of segwit. they even leant one of their spokesmen over to blockstream (mow) to help promote the bilatreal split plan.. and yet ven now BTCC refuses to have confidence to put its block rewards on a segwit(BC1q) address
https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000000b02343a0bd93fda8be0298c1bf16d0b084c1c014d567e  oh look 13TET  .. not bc1q

You lost me here. What?

and if 95% of the community really wanted segwit.. how come only 10% or less is actually using segwit

Are you sure? http://segwit.party/charts/#

Segwit transactions are in a steady climb. As a community more education is needed to make them see the benefits of Segwit. If only bitcoin.com helped.

again you have ignored the whole jgarzig+blockstream stuff.. just to continue the VER WU scripted kardashian distraction drama.

Because I cannot comment. I am still trying to contact some people on the story. Sorry again.

also yea 65% opposed cores roadmap.  core should not have said "attack, lets deport the opposition". but instead compromised. so that it stayed as one network of full community support.

65% of the miners you mean who were influenced by Bitmain because Segwit activation would mean killing Bitmain's covert AsicBoost.

anyway. as for the asic boost drama
that was a whole big laughing comedy. asic boost actually helps. if veryone used it then the network becomes mor secure and hashes blocks faster and with a higher difficulty than a network that does not use it.
but by gmax screaming its a threat. now a pool can use it while the core loyalist rfuse out of loyalty to gmax drama.. and so the ones using it can build blocks faster..
imagine it this way.. GPU mining days. everyone knew ATI was fastr than geforce. but imagine if gmax said ATI is an attack by having a bettr way to hasha block. lets boycott ati.. gmax loyalists would buy geforce and hash at a slower rate. allowing an outsider to come in with an ATI farm and ovr power it..
howevr back then people wer less loyal and more decentralist and so people went for ATI which made the network stronger knowing that a GPU farmer using geforce would have no chance[/quote]

Of course it is a threat. Bitmain produces 70% of all Asic Bitcoin miners, and are applying for the patent for AsicBoost. That would kill the other miners and hurt decentralization further.

Are you really on Jihan Wu's side on this matter?

as to you saying
"Does the direction of the network has to be what Satoshi wants? I thought it was supposed to be decentralized."
firstly its not about satoshi's wants.. he has gone.

Then is it right for Roger Ver to keep citing the Bitcoin whitepaper and also keep saying that Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin because "Satoshi"?

its about a feature that was built specifically to address issues of a community ivide that if used would not upgrade the network without majority support.. core AVOIDED that mechanism by first throwing out the competition. rathr than finding a majority community agreement (compromise)

No. Segwit would not activate because the miners, not the community, would not signal for it. Through the UASF, the community has spoken and the miners had to choose if to follow the community or split. They followed the community. What now?

as to the freedom to fork off
yea i got no problem with clams(unilateral split), litecoin(zero day fork) which pretty much just grabbed the code and done their own thing on a separate network
but when it comes to the community wanting certain things happening on a certain network. throwing them off the network via double team deception(via bilateral split) so that one team gains the stronghold. and then ringfenses the pools (via Fibre) so no one outside the team can use the same tactic against them. thus turning bitcoin core network into a tyranic monarchy.. is not decentralist practice, not moral, not ethical and goes against the whole point of the world thinking "bitcoin"(2009-2013) was decentralised and uncontrollable.

It was Bitcoin Cash's decision to hard fork and not follow the consensus rules anymore. They had that choice and the community is very free to follow them. It is not Core's fault if they do not want to.

Your problem is not with Core anymore. You already split to the network you like. Your problem is to convince the community to follow you. If you want them to follow you then throw Roger Ver out, he is doing more harm.

At any rate, I like some ideas in Bitcoin Cash too. I like the expansion of the OPcodes idea, FlexTrans and yes I like the idea of bigger blocks just to see how that develops.

Are there plans for a Counterparty Cash? I believe the bigger blocks are good for it.

[jiangsuren]

Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash :
Although i am not interested to comparing between BTC VS BCH.Because Bitcoin is favorite for everybody.But very few people little bit confused about Bitcoin price because price is not stable and some bad news working price dumping.
Bitcoin Cash turns out rigidly i think.Few days ago when i see price 900$ not it turn 1500$+ it's something bubble like that for me.

[Wind_FURY]

For everyone else's benefit I started another topic in the technical discussion subforum to ask about franky1's claim that Segwit is not backwards compatible in this new thread, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3670474.0

I believe some of franky1's posts are made to be misleading. It' up to you if you believe him or not.

[_noname_]

at the point when bch was presented there are a considerable measure of sentiments that happened, some accept bch devastate BITCOIN and some trust bch is the following BITCOIN, for me bch is wrecking BITCOIN, it make individuals befuddled when they need to contribute, on the grounds that a forking coin doesn't got a decent impression for the financial specialists, however since anybody can make their own coin so I don't accuse individuals to endeavor to make bch to exploit, so for me even it's crushing Bitcoin yet it's a reasonable rivalry, yet by one means or another I don't perceive any great future in bch

[Wind_FURY]

at the point when bch was presented there are a considerable measure of sentiments that happened, some accept bch devastate BITCOIN and some trust bch is the following BITCOIN, for me bch is wrecking BITCOIN,

I believe it is good for Bitcoin. Because if there are dissatisfied people in the community who want bigger blocks, then there it is. Leave us in peace.

But they want more. They want Bitcoin Cash to be "the real Bitcoin". Hahaha.

it make individuals befuddled when they need to contribute, on the grounds that a forking coin doesn't got a decent impression for the financial specialists,

?

however since anybody can make their own coin so I don't accuse individuals to endeavor to make bch to exploit, so for me even it's not crushing Bitcoin yet it's a reasonable rivalry, yet by one means or another I don't perceive any great future in bch

Fixed that for you.

[Superways]

Bitcoin cash is supposed to have came with a good features than bitcoin and with good performance than bitcoin but people love to use bitcoin and they rely more on bitcoin. Most of the people shifted to bitcoin cash but it not left bitcoin as weaker as from that time the price of bitcoin is tripled and now is also increasing with the passage of time.

[inyakizuryel]

I prefer bitcoin over bitcoin cash, BCH is just a fork coin of bitcoin so it has no chance to dethrone the original, only the chinese and the koreans supports bitcoin cash meanwhile bitcoin is supported wholewide so bitcoin is still the best.

We are on the same side brother, I think for me I will still choose bitcoin over any other coin, most especially when the bitcoin's price and value will be stable or should I say more stable. I think bitcoin is still and forever be the best.

[israfil]

I thought many things about Bitcoin and believe in Bitcoin. I know it's the right reason. The community is backing it up to 100%
I have not seen any purpose in the Bitcoin cache, without guesses. Maybe someone can try to change my mind?

[nalinpuri]

No way is this true. Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash are two different cryptos which doesnt depend on each other.If anything happened to Bitcoin Cash it will not effect bitcoin. 

[hv_]

The dilemma was to let split our young crypto community before reaching a teenage stage.

To not permit open and free exegesis of the one and only true white paper we have.

So now we are just into open micro competition in crypto that let most forget about to keep the FEDs in the dilemma with us!


In such a case, better go back to start again and rethink why we all are here.


Don't forget about the big picture what needs to get achieved here.

[jhonnydeep87]

Bitcoin cash can cause a lot of chaos because new people are confused where bitcoin is the original form. They are really desperate to be able to get more users than the impossible bitcoins after a lot of pumping in bitcoin cash and spam attacks happen in bitcoin. 1 year since bitcoin cash was created and it becomes a panic every month.

[BitcoinGirlOlga]

Bitcoin Cash this fork, which has its advantages, but I can not say better!
I personally support the idea more Bitcoin !

[Solomonkingdom]

People complain when they lose money. What they care most about is the amount of money, not technology.

[tanjilrifat]

They are really desperate to be able to get more users than the impossible bitcoins after a lot of pumping in bitcoin cash and spam attacks happen in bitcoin.Most of the people shifted to bitcoin cash.

[KingScorpio]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

bitcoin cash is logical result, people never, get fed up with money and power.

i even expect that the flow of ico will only stop as soon as people start to develop a hatred against it.

[tegarp90]

Curious to see what people's thoughts are on this topic. There is a strong side of protesters who believe BCH and Roger Ver is hurting the overall market while others support their actions.

Overall the loud banter on the topic is not progressive for the market to grow, thoughts?

BCH will never beat BTC because people won't move, let's see just right now, if btc price drops, All coins must be bleeding (except coin that has an event)
So, btc will be always at the top and people won't leave it

[shesheboy]

Bitcoin Cash this fork, which has its advantages, but I can not say better!
I personally support the idea more Bitcoin !

advantage of what ? i dont think that forked coins are more important than the original coins .

 bitcoincash maybe a little bit faster and cost cheaper in terms of transactions but other forked coins like bitcoin gold etherium classic , bitcoin core , bitcoin silver , etc are now becoming obsolete since people arent really interested on them .

in the meantime , bitcoin is still the best crypto coin when compared to bitcoincash or any other alternative coins and tokens out there .

[Jackolantern]

to my mind, it is much better to use btc than any other its variations because btc remains the leader and it is the best coin ever found. to my mind, the best way is to use btc always and it will be even more popular now

[ChristinBenly]

These full-blown topics will die as it does not lead to the answer that the creator of the topic wants. just like asking "think about kylie vs khloe kardashian" but hate it when people reveal it though jenner people and kardashian people .. Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash. But few people have any bitterness about Bitcoin because of unstable prices and some bad news of dumping. Bitcoin Cash turns out stiffly I think. For the benefit of others, I started another topic in the subforum technical discussion to ask about the requirement of franky1 that Segwit is not backward compatible in this new thread. It is up to you if you believe him or not.