The Battle And Future Of Bitcoin In Jeopardy
I went on We Are Change recently to talk about the future of bitcoin with Luke Rudkowski.
There is so much going on in the cryptocurrency space. One of the biggest things being talked about is the highjacking of Blockstream and Bitcoin Core by globalist influence.
Many believe Blockstream is working to purposely make bitcoin slower with more expensive transaction fees. They openly advocate this and claim it is ok to have these changes because they prefer to look at bitcoin as a “value layer” in the market, rather than a pragmatic payment system for smaller transactions.
That, in and of itself, is a dramatic change from what bitcoin was designed to be by its creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. And, a dramatic change from what everyone I am aware of who has been in bitcoin since 2009 thought it was supposed to be.
In this sense, bitcoin, or Bitcoin Core, has been a hard fork of bitcoin!
The Bitcoin Core/Blockstream group has essentially censored the discussion so that the other side of the argument can’t be heard on Reddit which is an immediate red flag. Not to mention, seemingly employing an army of trolls to attack those who stand up to this fork of the vision of bitcoin.
Because of pressure from honest users and developers in the community, Bitcoin Core stated a while ago that they would wind up increasing the blocksize - something they said would happen as a result of the Segwit2x fork, which as everyone now knows, did not end up happening.
Many people from the get-go stated that Blockstream would never allow the blocksize to be increased. I gave them the benefit of the doubt. As we now know it was scrapped and those people turned out to be absolutely correct.
It is for this reason that I, among others, have pointed out that Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is closer to being the “real” bitcoin than Bitcoin Core as it can actually be used to transfer funds in a practical, low cost, and efficient manner. Which, if it can’t, is basically bankercoin.
Who wants to wait hours for a transaction to be completed and pay high fees when there are other, more efficient currency options available?
Well, as I always say, the free market will decide.
Hear much more in my interview with Luke Rudkowski:
I have been telling TDV subscribers since August to hold on to their Bitcoin Cash because I knew this was likely going to happen.
Many at the time got very angry and unsubscribed. I don’t care. I will always speak my truth.
Subscribe HERE to get our best information and analysis before the rest of the market.
I deal all day every day in bitcoin. Like you, I live in a hispanic country outside the USSA.
Every time Bitcoin gets slow, I stop selling it. They get a huge "Bitcoin is broken right now, can I interest you in some Dash? Or how about some Ethereum?" Let me tell you. There are a lot of new Dash users since then.
One who bought Ethereum now has 5 rigs going..
In Dec. 16 I sold well over 100 leaving only a few bitcoins in my wallet. I bought Dash, Dash went from $9 to $300+ and I am ok with that.
Good pick haha
Good pick hehe
So Bitcoin Cash is the "Real" Bitcoin.... Oh My!
I wouldn't say that.
"Real" in the sense that it is a fork that behaves more like the original developers and early enthusiasts thought "Bitcoin" should.
Imo it makes a lot of sense to at least have the option of using a different chain, considering the mess BTC is in. But whether this becomes a "battle" over market domination is really up to the Bitcoin core team.
Neither coin is dying any time soon I think.
They are all real as long as they are instant and nearly free. So the real bitcoin is no longer "real" becuase it no longer works.
Bitcoin and all the BT(x) money will finally scale one day just as the internet scaled. It used to be imposible to email a video - now we have Netflix and Hulu.
BTC over BCH any day. Look at the people behind BCH and where most of the trading for it takes place and you will quickly see how manipulative this group is! Also don't forget if you had bitcoin in your coinbase account or any other number of other services that did not support it during the hard fork your going to get it when it unlocks. These means millions of BCH are currently locked up which is just inflating the costs of one right now let alone the mining algorithm on BCH is still broke.
Everything is not about the price and how much it can go up, some people are concerned with getting the product we were promised. A peer to peer network for value exchange which delivers fast and can't be shut down.
Literally 1,200 + other options out there that can process payments that came before BCH
Bitcoin use case is even worse if you are going to make that argument. Segwit doesnt fix the scaling issue and breaks the chain of signatures.
Woah Woah, that's actually true as fuck, dogecoin transaction fees are 1/10 of bitcoin cash atm of writing...
Those are not actually equal options, considering that they don't have the same starting block history as BTC, much less support by early BTC adopters and a lack of mining industry/other economic support built up around them.
Come on Jeff, I've been a follower for a long time and you're better than this pump and dump nonsense. You're also smart enough to know that a block-size increase is a temporary solution that isn't scaleable.
Core's Bitcoin will smash the banks, and the only scaleable way to do that is with additional layers. Take the politics and conspiracy theories out of it, it's a matter of technical fact. The financial world can't run with every micro-transaction being logged to a blockchain.
Satoshi's vision was also for privacy, the Core roadmap is more inline with this than is BCH's... who is supported by that stoolie Garzik and his analytics machine.
Yup, its sad really.
Whatever, BCH has eased the critical capacity problem, whereas BTC has not yet.
Jeff has missed the forest for one uprooted, gaudy tinsel draped tree.
BCH is centralized as fuck. Jihan Wu is sketchy as fuck. He
operatesmanipulates mining out of communist China. You think he is a truly independent actor? That BCH is censorship resistant?MIcropayments will never scale on-chain - you don’t have to be a mathematician to grasp that.
Jeff has swallowed one too many conspiracy pills and is now constipated as fuck. Let’s hope it isn’t terminal. JB’s credibility was iffy at best, and it’s down the tubes now.
Someone please post evidence that some globalist has control over Blockstream, and that Blockstream has control over the loose knit open source meritocracy that is ‘Core’.
I'm curious why can't micropayments scale on chain? Because the network will grow too fast and everybody won't be able to run a full node?
Genuinely want to know.
Because even if Bitcoin simply replaced fiat in like form, and not doing anything advanced beyond that, we'd be looking at blocks in the terrabytes.... which leads to a chain in the exabytes and beyond.
Nailed it.
Why would I go with corporate / fake satoshi coin? The circulating supply is inflated by approximately 130,000 BCH!
Did we look at the internet protocol in 1994 and decide that since it couldn't support streaming HD video, Social Media, etc that it was time to change the protocol?
Small blocks work and there is no need to be slamming a settlement layer with micro transactions... we have the lightning network.
BTC
I really doubt you could broadcast and validate a cryptocurrency via satellite with mega sized blocks. This is about keeping it decentralized and censorship resistent. Anything else is either misguided thinking, or an outright attack on our future decentralized vision. Berwick, you shouldn’t type up shit before really thinking it through. Reputations are lost in a heartbeat in the Internet Age.
It's good to have options. BCH is what Bitcoin used to be + bigger blocks, which is entirely in line with Satoshi plans and importantly does not have to be the end of improvements.
Also, Bitcoin is not quite like the internet. Speculative and revolutionary technology that enables greater connectivity yes, but similarities end there.
-For your information though, the internet needs an update as well. It's not what it should be.
The internet is constantly scaling and will have to continue. My point was that this is a marathon, not a sprint.
That much I can agree with.
Was it Satoshi's vision to inflate the circulating supply of BCH by nearly 130,000 above what the block rewards should have paid out? This must be fake Satoshi we are talking about...
Being a Satoshi or original Bitcoin fundamentalist is not practical, nor is it what I suggested.
I don't see the inflation or the companies as a bigger threat than the current people in charged already stopping the implementation of changes that would bring the fees and unconfirmed transaction issues down significantly.
That's not to say that I really see those other people and their associated organizations as much of a threat either. I think BCC will help encourage necessary changes to the BTC organization. It doesn't appear to me that either coin is going away yet. I think they will both be valuable and valued.
That's a misnomer - inflation. The coins are generated slightly faster, but final total is the same at 21 million. That's not inflation.
Last time I checked, small blocks too often don't work. And how many years yet to wait for Lightning?
The BCH pump was clearly an attack on Bitcoin. This attack was build off 3 parts.
First part was technical: The EDA in BCH made miners mine way more blocks per time unit than BTC, because of this INFLATION mining on BCH was way more profitable, so the leverage wherein hashing power shift by a rise of price was enormous.
BCH had 70 % of the total hash power for a while, even when the price was still way lower. Because miners went away from BTC to mine the more profitable chain (this is as designed) BTC blocks took longer and in combination with a lot of spam transactions the network got clogged.
This EDA was a FLAW. How pathetic is it if you have to beat your opponent using a technical flaw in your system (Thought you believe in fair free markets?!?
Second part was economic: If you see the charts of BCH it was really a pump & dump. Also 80% of the volume came from one exchange in Korea, interesting enough the volume started to spread over different exchanges just before the dump started. The intention of this pump was to let as many as possible miners jump to BCH (possible because of the flaw) so that BTC got stocked.
Part nr. 3 was social: Already before the pump started I saw the some people online talking about the 'flippening'. At that moment BCH was only at 5% of BTC and the pump had not started yet. This makes me very suspicious that they were pre informed and probably paid. When the pump happened on Reddit BCH posts were heavily / unnatural up voted and BTC was down voted till invisibility. (Roger complains about censorship?) On Youtube only BCH moon videos were visible, there was no single BTC video available if you searched for bitcoin. This was overwhelming and will have mislead many people and let them lose money by buying in to this pump and dump. Also the moment that 2x was cancelled was perfectly chosen, frustrated big blockers could leverage the planned 'flippening'.
You took place in this attack by posting your recent article exactly at that time (it is very suspicious that exactly that day you found your theory that Blockstream is influenced by bankers). Joining this attack is very strange, because you say in your post you are not sure about core. This means you are not sure but tried to help to destroy THE REAL BITCOIN.................
I don't support either side over the other, but while blockchain politics is clearly involved this wasn't the first time that transactions did not confirm or that fees were high. This has been happening for a long time.
Bitcoin is changed via consensus, not sticking up your middle finger and forking off and then telling everyone you're the real deal. If you want to know a surefire way to tell who the enemies of bitcoin are (whether they know it or not) it's the people who mock, dismiss or belittle consensus. Or flat out lie and claim they have it when they don't like S2X proponents did at first. Consensus is Satoshi's vision. Not this crap. Segwit got consensus from everyone, nodes, users, devs, and miners. That's why it changed bitcoin itself instead of creating a new coin. Consensus is difficult to get by design. What happens if by some miracle bcash becomes "bitcoin"? (it won't) There will just be disagreement again and more forks. Jeff you are now an enemy of bitcoin because you support a coin that not only broke consensus rules but did so willingly because everyone on their side doesn't care about consensus at all unless it suits them. Bcash never even TRIED to get consensus to become bitcoin, thus never even TRIED to BE bitcoin, thus never WILL be bitcoin. If you wanted to raise the blocksize so bad you should have stood on the technical merits of it and convinced everyone to agree to it. That's how you could have fired core, by convincing everyone to stop running the core client and running one that ups the blocksize at a certain block height, there would have been nothing core could do about that. but you blew it and made things worse for yourself and the whole market, you don't know it yet but you will. You've shown everyone who understands bitcoin that core are actually the people who respect consensus and not the bcash side.
BCH "broke concensus rules"?
The posibility of forks and other experimentation - like segwit/segwit2x and disagreements over it - are there by design.
Nice work Jeff. Good to see you calling it how you see it without concern for all the hate you'll get for your opinion. Doesn't matter to me if you're right or wrong because in my book that is called INTEGRITY and that's worth more than being right.
In this case I think you're right though ;)
Good reporting on this issue. It is shocking that too many people in power think high transaction costs are a good thing. Pride before the fall comes to mind. I hope the BTC folks come to their senses soon and get back to true decentralization and low transaction fees.
Jeff, looks like tons of people are being misinformed and manipulated from the replies below. I shrugged too in Discus comments. Many simple requoting what they heard, they thought it's right. Rotten to the core. Their apple. But they don't know. And many don't understand how mining works and simply summarise to blame a certain country, so much easier to pin, as how they were indoctrinated to kill poor Vietnamese villagers decades ago. I'm getting Off The Blockchain Wall now. Can't explain to them anymore.