Haven't you realized yet that bcash is ... not serious about any of their supposed technical criticisms of bitcoin...
You are 100% full of shit on this point. Visit the world some day - it's a big place, with wonderful and varied experiences to be had and knowledges to be gained-ed.
I have been around long enough (and paying sufficient enough attention) to recognize that mostly speaking, the BIG blockers (which would include the bcasher crazies) are the ones who are mostly full of shit, and they use their technical criticisms of bitcoin as a pretext to attack it and to pump bullshit snake oil. Largely their true agenda is to ruin bitcoin by making bitcoin easier to change and therefore fucking up bitcoin's governance.. which makes bitcoin difficult to change (in its current state of affairs). Of course, there are exceptions to any broad generalization, so you are likely to find people (perhaps even your dumbass naive self- if you really were to believe your own bullshit), who really believe (hard as that might be to believe) that there is some kind of technical flaws in bitcoin .. blah blah blah.. but mostly those are the dumbasses who are listening to a bunch of bullshit and buying into hopium propaganda.
Yeah, not only do you not understand the codebase (as you admit),
Irony meter pegged.
I don't think that there is irony, diptwat. My point was about the sound money aspect of bitcoin, and you edited that part of my response out. You don't have to understand code in order to understand value propositions of bitcion, so get over any kind of bullshit attempt to lord over any technical knowledge that you and other computer science educated folks might have, when they don't seem to understand the BIGGER picture, including the sound money aspect of bitcoin that differentiates it from other cryptos... name one that is even close.... go on... do it. ( yeah right bcash? yeah right bcash sv? those are not even close to bitcoin even though they try to use the name to spread disinformation and act like they are the same thing - and better)
LN remains voluntary and relatively small and experimental...
So you concede that LN has not yet demonstrated itself to be a viable mechanism for scaling BTC. Fine.
I am not conceding anything of the sort, except perhaps that adoption and testing takes a considerable amount of time, and likely more time when working within largely open source systems that provides a variety of options and is still being developed and tested in a variety of ways. Lightning network, bitcoin on chain, segwit and a variety of other bitcoin related features are still being rolled out and adopted and switched around.. takes time, dude.. takes time.. but progress seems good too, and ongoing.