Topic: Is loss of bitcoin.com a setback for Bitcoin Core? (Read 480 times)

Bitcoin is not going to be the leader forever and nor is bitcoincash. Promoting every crypto is ultimately in favor of every cryptocurrencies and most probably is the best way to fulfill satoshi's dream. But at least we should agree to something like naming and not confuse the new comers.
If someone came to the market for buying bitcoincash but didn't find anything like that and never spent his money on crypto than it would not be a positive signal for crypto progress.

put your social drama aside. its got nothing to do with faming up cash or faming down core. its about understanding that there is not one. even your own words 'all other forked bitcoins' shows you deep down beneath the social drama still show linkage of 'bitcoin' towards the forks.
by knowing they are forks of. and yes even segwit is a fork of 'bitcoin' 2009-2017. again you know they are forks. and its not to suggest btc is any less popular. its just saying there is not just one.

yes they are altcoins.
analogy: yes canadian dollar is a alt currency of US dollar. yes australian dollar is an alt currency of us dollar. its not suggesting canadian/australian is any better or worse. its just clarifying that the US is not the sole controller of 'dollar'.

you pretending something doesnt exist/didnt happen may help your core loyalty, but doesnt help the millions of people in the world to understand the complexity of the issue

the simplest analogy is the 'bitcoin/dollar' comparison

"UASF" was just a buzzword and a hat logo. the code/implementation method of it didnt actually need community consensus opt-in to activate it. it was a mandatory activation that used/abused 'compatible nodes' and also controlled features like DNS and Fibre. if you really want to get involved in how things technically happened atleast look into it before assuming.


again the mulit community of bitcoin would be a different scenario if things were as a unified consensus network of keeping the commUNITY together (research byzantine generals theory) whereby real consensus is used by making real commUNITY decisions. rather than social drama of 'if you dont like A's rule proposal heres a mandatory aparthied campaign to kick you out' controversial forks

That's very disingenuous of you to drag Bitcoin down in Bitcoin Cash's level. Or maybe you were lifting Bitcoin Cash up to Bitcoin's level?

Newbies, don't let him confuse you. There's only one Bitcoin. The Bitcoin with the highest hashing power, the Bitcoin with the greatest marketcap value, the Bitcoin that has the largest accumulated POW, the Bitcoin that has the "BTC" ticker.

All the other forked Bitcoin coins are altcoins.



It was the community. Remember UASF.

It is indeed they make the site has an option, and force a newbie to choose. But You should realize who backed the website. It is clearly stated in the footer that Rover Ver is the (CEO). We all know how awful he is, and because the site owned by him, he could easily spread false and biased information, to make newbs things BTRASH is the real Bitcoin. A brand new user shouldn't be blamed when they bought the wrong coin since they got biased information.

Most people don't know the differences between those domains, but I believe the .com domain sound more legitimate for a non-techie person. Which I believe it has a high chance to mislead mainstream.

Its very clear and can be seen that bitcoin.com was created when the going was still smooth between the bitcoin cash founder with bitcoin and believe he can tarnish the image of bitcoin to have a good ride in bch which is not possible and only a newbies will be surprise and join that scam as real btc but those that read and know what real btc is always go against him.

As mentioned previously, the largest problem the new investors face while buying through bitcoin.com is they send the bitcoincash to their bitcoin address. This as is impossible would make the very first transaction of the new user a failure, a scam. It would not only make him/her distrust bitcoin but also every cryptocurrency. If they want to advertise bitcoincash, they should do that in an ethical way. Just say why bitcoincash is better bitcoin and don't confuse people with the addresses.

You should check bitcoin.com website. It has video tutorials to explain what is Bitcoin and how it works. The videos mention "Bitcoin" but guess what, they're explaining Bitcoin cash. So people think they're watching a video about BTC while it's about Btrash. They can't realize it immediately. There are surely a lot of people buying BCH but thinking they're purchasing BTC

They don't mislead people only via bitcoin.com, they also use other channels/platforms

Well I think it's the newbies fault here. I am not a BCH supporter but the site clearly says that BTC and BCH are two separate things. Even when you go to buy bitcoin it has 2 options: BCH and BTC.
So that must easily explain that person has to make a choice to buy between two separate coins. If the person doesn't understand the difference between the two then google can help easily solve this.
Even after this if the user is buying BCH thinking it as BTC then it is clearly the user's fault in this.

And no "bitcoin.com" doesn't seem like a set back to me. The thing is not many know the difference between the .com and .org versions.
If they get to know why Satoshi had bought .org then it must be pretty clear that why .org was necessary for bitcoin and not the .com

People definitely get influenced to buy bitcoin cash over bitcoin when they visit bitcoin.com and I'm sure a lot of new crypto users visit bitcoin.com first to see what it is all about.  I'm sick of the fighting myself and want to see all the top coins succeed, there is no reason we can't all support each other.  There is more than enough new money to be spread around.

Roger Ver is recognized to be one of the leading figure in the world of cryptocurrency but for many he has lost his good reputation when he started Bitcoin Cash and made a war with those who continue to support the real bitcoin. In my opinion, too much greed has gone into his head that he don't care too much even if his many actions can affect bitcoin. People who have been here in this industry are already aware of who Roger Ver is and what he tried to do with the bitcoin ecosystem.

Bitcoin is a community based project while Bitcoincash has business involved. Bitcoincash might even be better than Bitcoin in many aspects. They would do anything to promote their holdings and are generally more successful with their advertising than volunteer supported projects. But it would not undermine the Bitcoin project.

i hope you realize that your title is wrong because you are asking about effects of a website (bitcoin.com) on a full node client (bitcoin core)!

as for bitcoin.com, unfortunately they have been scamming people for some time now. ever since they created their centralized token called bitcoin-cash they have been selling it to newbies in the name of bitcoin. there even have been cases where a newbie bought what they told him was "bitcoin" and waited to receive it in their wallets but they never received anything because they actually bought an altcoin (BCH) and were waiting to receive it in their bitcoin wallet.
you can see dozens of this type of issue in the tech support board, specially in 2017 when there were a large number of new newbies coming in.

In reality there is nothing cruel over here as it is a commercial domain extension and we have the professional one, we could have purchased that domain a long back as we could have collected enough funds as a community to purchase the commercial domain but no one bothered to do that even with the funds we had from the situation i understand, newbies coming into this market should understand the difference between BTC and BCH even if they advertise it as the real bitcoin.

You really cannot do anything about the domain name, i am sure the bitcoin community had enough funds to purchase that domain if they wanted as i am sure everyone would have donated for that cause, but instead Roger Ver purchased that domain and he can do anything with the domain he purchased and if he supports bitcoin cash there is nothing you can do with it, until they scam some users you cannot raise anything negative against them which is highly unlikely .

this is shameful. how can someone be so cruel to bitcoin? I am sure he has also made a lot of profit from bitcoin and as it goes he is not against bitcoin and not even that. he is misleading people against bitcoin. we can not blame newbies about it but can expect them to switch to real bitcoin as soon as possible or else they are gonna lose a lot of money.

I don't see a problem here. What if .com was owned by core but all other were owned by BCH? Should we keep hunting for them to buy them all out?
Many companies and projects use different domains with governments using their own .gov and .org and .info being very common among big companies and startups. There's no rule saying that you need to have a .com domain to be legit and popular.

Roger did a lot of bad by calling BCH bitcoin and BTC bitcoin core but he also got bashed for it.

This is a big issue, why will Roger keeps misleading new investors! have people not burn enough from investing in bitcoincash? no matter how much we try to beat down the truth, it still finds a way to flow atop like a suppress water flow, when bitcoin moons heavily investors of BCH will realized they have been sold a false tale.

Offcourse it's a big setback and it's shame that Roger Ver owns this domain. Maybe it's not a big problem for us - experienced people as we know that Bitcoin don't have official website and CEO. I just looked at Google search result and guess what - Bitcoin.com website shown at the top and Bitcoin.org is only second. Where new people who don't know nothing about Bitcoin will go - probably to website which are shown at the top. And probably information there can confuse - what is Bitcoin, what is Bitcoin Core and etc. And we heard some cases when people bought Bitcoin Cash thinking that they are buying real Bitcoin. I'm not even talking about propaganda against Bitcoin that is published on Bitcoin.com.
What can be done to change situation. Probably nothing unfortunately...