Topic: That's why I chose bitcoincash instead of bitcoin. (Read 298 times)

When it came on the exchanges, BCH traded at 0.2BTC, now it's around 0.15BTC. So where's your unbelievable performance???  

I agree on your decision mate, that you choose bitcoin cash over bitcoin. Well, aside on the above positive advantages that you've been mention my point is goes like this. As I remember the bitcoin cash was started for about 8 months ago, which is so unbelievable performance since it still pumping as if this very moment. Bitcoin cash might have a great potential to reach over bitcoin but I think it may long way to run but it is a huge possible to happen.

BCH has nothing on bitcoin, if it's transaction volume hit the same as BTC it would suffer the same issues as BTC.
Some one else explained it better earlier but to put it simple, this is it.

BCH is much like BTC was at the same phase.

I'll take the well proven storage of wealth thanks.

I view BCH as a coin used for transfers where I'll swap right back to BTC on completion, many other coins like LTC serve this purpose well too.

BTC is much like gold, heavy but extremely proven, BCH is more like fiat, convenient but has nothing on gold for wealth storage over a long term.

LOL, I love this irony very much! Really who can tell us that he or she has the same way of thinking? I doubt that here the author of the post will find many (or even a few) real supporters. IMHO.

I have read the emails and whitepaper. Lets keep that settled.
The vision i talked about is the difference between the visions of BCash and BTC. Not Satoshi's vision per se. Maybe you should argue on that without bringing Satoshi into it.

Of course he wanted miners to run full nodes. He assumed that anybody with a CPU and willing enough would be able to mine. 1 CPU=1 Vote right?? That would have been correct on his part if it was possible for everyone to be a miner and run a full node.

In reality, being a miner now needs specialized ASICs with thousands in investment(which he did not envision). When he said that users would use SPV wallets, he meant that for a scale where everyone and even the most non-tech people would be the users. Of course, they wouldn't run nodes.
The nodes would still need to be run by a vigilant community of technologists and hobbyists. Mining was taken away by ASICs and now Full nodes too go away in Bcash vision with a higher block size. (without the underlying improvements)

So now you want to believe a report from the "Government" because, of course, they would never do anything to undermine something that threatens their existing financial structure.
If there is one entity that doesn't want Bitcoin/BTC to move ahead is the government. Supporting something like Bcash is a very easy way to do that.

So what argument do they give to prove that Bitcoin core client that does not support BCash is not the product of the original repository anymore.

You want to believe an article and a government report, fine. But at least think who benefits from it. Maybe then you can see the motivation someone would have to call BCash as the original coin. The Altcoin that only has a small minority of original supporters and which will be much more pliant to them than a rebellious majority that maintains the original BTC/ Bitcoin repository.

They give the argument about SegWit in the article. SegWit is a consensus driven soft-fork that is supported by the core client. The blocksize increase in BCash makes it invalid on all BTC nodes and that why its BCash which is a fork. I can see why the newcomers would lean more toward supporting Bcash. Lower price, Chance of growth, Payouts in tippr bots for praising and a generally more newbie driven community because they want a bigger army of small soldiers on the ground.

Such report only make it clear the conceited belligerence of banks and governments towards BTC. BTC takes away the status quo from them. That is what they fear and that is what marketers like Roger Ver weaken with their confusing shilling about being the real bitcoin. If you want to be their lower guard, you are welcome.

I'd suggest, keep your BCash all you want,. Trade it, Spend it, but don't direct unnecessary FUD towards bitcoin because that way the actual winner is going to be someone else.

see how the word "bitcoin" is present in your post, it just shows that bitcoin is very important

about your preference no one can judge you, you are free to choose any coin, but do not make comparisons between bitcoin vs bitcoin cash because this type of discussion do not have a good ending and nothing productive.

bitcoin cash is an altcoin and this is not going to change.


I also sold everything and bought more bitcoins

Everybody can choose all they want but the truth still remains that the most popular one will always prevail in the end. I too believe that bitcoin cash follows what satoshi has intended for bitcoin to be but it is still early for it to beat BTC.

we have no coin which is called "bitcoin core". there is bitcoin cash and bitcoin.

when you compare two things, you omit the things they share specially when you are saying one is better than the other because of ....
i don't know if you are just trying to make your list longer or just wasn't thinking but half your list is shared between two. in fact the only thing that you can claim is not shared is the fees. now lets get down to it.

only because nobody is using it. it shares this attribute with at least 1500 altcoins with empty blocks which contain less than 20 tx. when you have blocks that are only 2-3% full (200-300 kB) you get low "cost" transactions.

that is the attribute of any peer to peer network! you are sending a transaction which is practically some data on average 250 bytes with some overhead which won't even reach 1 kB which you will send/receive in an instant!

i don't know what you have in mind when you say "reliable". care to elaborate?

that has never been a good idea. double spending a transaction with 0 confirmation is not as hard as you think. and from day 1 of bitcoin's existence i don't think anybody ever suggested 0 confirmation is safe and you started this topic with the words "Satoshi's vision"!

it is more centralized than you think.
research about how the fork for difficulty adjustment was performed....

you already said the development and the network is permissionless now but it won't last long if blocks start to become 8 MB and then they fork to 32 MB and running a full node becomes harder and harder and eventually impossible for regular people and you end up with centralized hubs which are the only option for you to connect to.

as if the rest of 1700 altcoins are closed source?

well BCH forked from bitcoin's source code and shares all the consensus rules up to the date of the fork (~1 August) and nothing has changed in these consensus rules. as i said above these are not reasons for preferring it over bitcoin.

I think bitcoin cash is an alternative of bitcoin that's why bitcoin cash made so that when bitcoin is dropping like today there is still an alternative coin that can have to invest because some investors will go bitcoin cash just like you. Bitcoin is still the leading and number 1, bitcoin will always be an alternative and bitcoin will still the 1st and the leading.

Seriously? Have you ever read all the stuff Satoshi actually said? Go read the whitepaper and all his emails. What you'll find is that "bitcoin" as it is today and the direction core is taking it, is not what he envisioned. He envisioned exactly what bitcoin cash is. One can argue that what core is doing is the right path and that Satoshi designed a flawed product that they need to "fix". But he said miners would run full nodes and users SPV wallets. He said when they needed bigger blocks they'd just do a fork to increase the size. So please don't imply what core has done with bitcoin is the original Satoshi design/vision.

For the record, I think both coins are fundamentally flawed and will never be able to achieve what people really want, which, IMO, is to have a completely decentralized currency with which to buy a cup of coffee without having to pay some ridiculous fee.

Bch = thanks for the free money.   Sold up at $3400.

So your name is racist?
What ideology is that? Are you out of your mind that Satoshi Nakamoto wrote about bitcoin? Bitcoin cash is just a fork coin, are you a comedian?
Oh the irony, do you really know what's the meaning of decentralization? Ask the leader of the troll army who turned away himself from being one of the first bitcoin start up investor.

Bitcoin has lost its purpose. In December, the transaction fee was as high as $100 per transaction. How can BTC be used for making payments, when the fee is this high? It may be suitable for transactions worth more than $10,000. But most of us use BTC for making transfers for far less amounts.

Here the report
https://cointelegraph.com/news/fork-fail-us-government-claims-bitcoin-cash-is-original-bitcoin

There’s even a white paper on the subject.

OK, and what makes this altcoin so special? It brings nothing new. Anyone can make a fork of Bitcoin and tell the same things as you did.
Imho all Bitcoin Whatever forks are all scam. And you know why? Because their only purpose is to get money off people.
You know what's the only one difference between BCash and any other random fork of Bitcoin? The money invested in it to get it listed at exchanges and create hype around it.

You are ranked as a member at the forum and you are touting "Low cost, Fast transaction" etc. as some sort of advantage. The only reason on-chain transaction on Bcash are fast as of now is that the amount of transactions simply hasn't approached the level of bitcoin.
I took screenshots of the BTC and BCash blocks in this post sometime back. See for yourself.

Their so called development mostly involves marketing and cooking up foundations run by a small group of people. It is nowhere near the approach that the core developers had towards the bitcoin development through all these years.

The reality is that BCash is simply another Altcoin. What you should understand is that you don't have to become a BCash shill and "choose" between BTC and BCash. Keep your Bcash all you want but don't forget that Bitcoin is the original. If an alt starts promoting itself as the original then its just clever marketing and media against the community.
If you feel so inclined then you can read here my reasons why I choose Bitcoin and not BCash.

BCash was just one of the many breaks from original. It just changed a basic parameter, that is the maximum block size. It was a hard-fork from the original chain as none of the nodes running the original bitcoin client (maintained in the original bitcoin repository) would support it.

They have a vision that involves specialized mining hardware running people with enough data storage and upgrade capabilities to maintain a full node that would result from an increased block size. They see users as running the SPV wallet while miners maintain the network as well as full node.

The real/ original Bitcoin (call it Bitcoin core if you like) vision is to always keep it possible for anybody willing to give the time to be able to run a full node with hardware investment not being an entry barrier.

Why is a full node important? Well, A full node is what validates the chain and transactions. It follows the consensus rules agreed by community of merchants and users running full nodes. If only miners/ businesses run full nodes, there is nothing stopping them from changing the rules to their own advantage.

These "reports" that you read are the same people that want you to believe what they tell you to. Go beyond the media/ marketing and judge for yourself.
 

I remember reading a report a few days ago that claims that bitcoincash is the original and the current bitcoin is the fork.

I think this is an interesting idea.
bitcoin cash is just a fork of the bitcoin, you can create a  fork, can create a new better than bitcoin cash fork, so why do we need to value the bitcoin cash?