A Statement Regarding the November Hardfork

55 1397
Avatar for BitcoinCast
Written by
3 years ago

It’s obvious there’s been a lot of political drama in bitcoin cash as of lately. I’ve found it wise to stay out of the politics for the most part. It’s enabled me to keep good working relationships with more people in the space, but aside form that, its also enabled me to keep my focal point in bitcoin cash: Focusing on and promoting user and merchant adoption.


I’m writing this article to share this message with the people involved with bitcoin cash: 1.“No matter what happens to BCH in November, I’m staying with it”, and 2. “I’m not worried about the outcome either”.

Starting with the first statement. Why am I committed to the BCH chain? Simple answer: “I’m in it to promote its adoption, not its politics. Although I do have a preference for one of the node teams to gain the majority hash in November, and it is somewhat important to me, it is not as important to me as sticking with the network effect of bitcoin cash and promoting adoption on it.


What do I want the outcome in November to be? It doesn’t matter. This brings me to my second statement of why I’m not worried about the outcome. I view bitcoin as simply a mechanism that rewards actors on the network for acting in their own interest and seeking profit on it. If you think about it, miners will be the ones most affected by the November hard fork since they will be the ones paying the 8% of the block reward. If they choose to run the client with the IFP in it, then they will bear the brunt of the results of their own actions. It’s on them. Why should I be so worried about what business decisions miners make. It’s their business, not mine.


I’ll conclude here by asking a question. Why are you involved with bitcoin cash? Are you there to mine blocks, develop software, spread adoption, seek profit? Or are you mainly in it to be a part of a political book club?

I plead with the readers of this article: Evaluate the reason/motivation you’re involved with bitcoin. Resolve to stay with bitcoin cash whether the November outcome goes your way or not. Take encouragement if that’s what you have already decided to do.


P.S. As an additional effort to help my BCH friends to move their focus out of the bookclub and on to adoption, I’ve left a small amount of BCH below for the first claimer. Go and onboard someone. Print out some of those bitcoin.com gifts to hand out. Thank you very much.

72
$ 6.41
$ 1.00 from @Cain
$ 1.00 from @Mengerian
$ 1.00 from @Mel
+ 10
Avatar for BitcoinCast
Written by
3 years ago

Comments

If you think about it, miners will be the ones most affected by the November hard fork since it will affect whether or not their mining becomes 8% less profitable or not.

completely wrong, not miners, but BCH holders

$ 0.01
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

What's the argument to say that BCH holders pay?

$ 0.00
User's avatar JustinMiles
3 years ago

Same as any other inflation. Be it a currency inflation or new stock emission.

$ 0.01
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

Maybe I'm missing something but the total coinbase would remain the same, wouldn't it?

$ 0.00
User's avatar JustinMiles
3 years ago

Yes the rate of inflation does not change. But that doesn't change the fact of who is bearing the cost of that inflation, right?

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

As a holder, I don't see how it would matter that 100% of the coinbase goes to miners or 92% to the miners and 8% to the devs. The coinbase is the same in both scenarios.

$ 0.00
User's avatar JustinMiles
3 years ago

alright so next time you are about to spend 100$ you dont mind me taking 10$ in the process right? because for you there is no difference - you have 100$ less in both cases, no new cost for you, right?

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

Why would he care if he got the $100 item he was buying and the seller sent $10 of the seller's money to the seller's IT department.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

of course he does not get the $100 item he was buying ..same as the bch holders dont get 100% of the hashrate if a percentage of that budget gets diverted to pay developers.

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

No, I suppose you are right, they only get 99.75 of their $100 item, but, they also get $100 worth of development funding to make their tokens worth more over time. Potentially 1000% more. So, users get at least $110 worth of the item. Users definitly win. The army of social engineering agents that fooled you into not seeing that appears to be much smarter than either of us.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

alright so next time you are about to spend 100$ you dont mind me taking 10$ in the process right? i promise to use it for your benefit, promoting BCH or something ;) this is not a question or an invitation for discussion btw, we have already located you and im sending my guy to collect your contribution

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

If the inflation does not change, their is no new "cost" of that inflation.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

There is no inflation. That's more troll dishonesty fooling people into saying that.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

The "holders pay" argument is well crafted social engineering and fools many. It is slightly true, but insignificant. The miners pay. Mostly BTC miners with powerful social engineering teams. They are working to fool our community and keep us from funding BCH developers (and becoming a more serious threat to their house-of-cards).

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

what if there was only 1 chain? do miners still pay?

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

Of course. It is their money and they earned it before donating it.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

from whom did they earn it? perhaps the holders? :) what was the contract exactly?

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

The owner of BCH. Spoiler, there is no owner. The block rewards are a part of the code we call BCH. Holders know they will be distributed and where they go.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

alright value magically appears from nowhere. got it ;) There are no TSLA owners. You convinced me, thanks.

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

After reading some of the responses on reddit, I will now state what would be a deal breaker for me if it happened in bitcoin cash:

  1. Basic usability as cash is broken (as with BTC)

  2. Inflation beyond the 21M supply

  3. Switching from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake

I think that's about it. It's not that I don't care about other undesirable changes happening, but that I want to stick with BCH promoting p2p cash for as long as possible.

$ 0.05
User's avatar BitcoinCast
3 years ago

Well said. I think we do need better leadership. When a better team proves itself loyal and willing to do the work someday, I would be happy to see that.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

nothing wrong with you not caring. just please try to understand why other people do care if you are going to talk about it.

$ 0.00
User's avatar tula_s
3 years ago

hmm

$ 0.00
User's avatar Helal72
3 years ago

The Fork if it occurs is going to hit hard, but all the same, I stay with BCH

$ 0.00
User's avatar Bestie
3 years ago

nice article

$ 0.00
User's avatar satplars
3 years ago

The problem is that a single person can change the consensus rules for their own benefit. Today it affects miners, but tomorrow it could be 8% of all network transactions, increase the 21M limit with pre-mined coins, and similar things. Once you open the door, there is no going back, confidence disappears. There is no difference with a centralized currency.

$ 0.00
User's avatar reizu
3 years ago

The problem is that a single person can change the consensus rules for their own benefit

Majority hashpower changes consensus rules, not a single person. It has always worked this way with Bitcoin and it is still how it will work under a non-ABC chain. If miners gauge that ABC doesn't deliver to the level of what they are getting paid, it will open a window for competing teams to earn more hashpower. Any team can at anytime offer an alternative with a 0%, 2% or 4% coinbase fee. If they don't gain hashpower by lowering the cost of their work you should ask why is that?

$ 0.00
User's avatar JustinMiles
3 years ago

sub to sub?

$ 0.00
User's avatar Jack689
3 years ago

good

$ 0.00
User's avatar rasedul1234
3 years ago

nice

$ 0.00
User's avatar rasedul1234
3 years ago

Great article

$ 0.00
User's avatar Asif178
3 years ago

You have done the right thing. The presence of politics in Bitcoin cash is not right. Bitcoin will have cash in its place and politics will have its place in politics. It is not right to put the two together.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Jon12
3 years ago

Nice.. Visit https://read.cash/@Tsm77/sorry-83f6febf

$ 0.00
User's avatar Tsm77
3 years ago

Nice article

$ 0.00
User's avatar Sakil
3 years ago

I'm standing with Bitcoin Cash, come what may

$ 0.00
User's avatar Commycool
3 years ago

The drama in Bitcoin cash is just getting too much

$ 0.00
User's avatar Abubakar
3 years ago

I am not concerned of split of the chain. I am concerned of split of the community. However, so far I have seen that the community is on one side, while abc is on the other. So I am not really concerned.

$ 0.00
User's avatar phamnuwen
3 years ago

Its obvious there is a hitup in bch, politics or not bch will definitely remain a potential crypto.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Spartacux
3 years ago

Thanks for supporting BCH!

I believe this community and chain fork-attempt is being pushed for less important reasons than justify harming BCH as much as the anti-BCH attackers hope this will. I hope they fail to break us.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

Nice

$ 0.00
User's avatar Munna-6.33
3 years ago

Nice and amazing

$ 0.00
User's avatar sobujr619
3 years ago

I understand why some people may not be too concerned about this specific decision, but that doesn't mean the politics are not relevant to them. When reflecting upon how this affects you, you should also think about the Grasberg example, not just the AFP.

Let me break down your question of why people are here:

Are you there to mine blocks? Then you should care about the politics because they will decide if a single implementation will be dictate the mining rules (remember Grasberg?) Also it will affect your profits.

Are you there to develop software? Then you should care about the politics because they will decide if things invented/implemented outside of ABC can make their way into BCH. Please watch one developer meeting and reflect if you would rather work with Amaury compared to e.g. jtoomim.

Are you there to spread adoption? Then you should care about the politics because having block times changed makes the user experience worse for everyone. Going from many implementations to one will also take a way a unique selling point compared to our siblings BTC and BSV. Many idealists leaving the project would be big loss in terms of adoption as well.

Are you there to seek profit? Then you should care about the politics because the chances of corruption or capture go up significantly if you only have a single implementation. Many idealists leaving the project will also greatly hurt its chances of success.

In other words, everyone should care. They might not care now because the immediate impact of the AFP is low. Its mid and long term results (centralization, basically only one relevant implementation, leaving of many idealists, potential community split) however could be catastrophic.

Don't bury your head in the sand.

$ 0.01
User's avatar ZakMcRofl
3 years ago

I believe this person is a professional anti-BCH social engineering agent out to harm BCH while pretending to care about it.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Big-Bubbler
3 years ago

Can see why. After all, when the people went neutral we almost had this with May IFP. Right now, however, we need to show Amaury (ABC's fine, they have their own goals and IFP can help, but the way it was implemented is obviously Amaury) that we're all against him until he bends down to remove it, and by showing sides of the unique BCH chain (multi-node cooperative development for one protocol), those that want dissent will have to change the mind of the newcomers first.

We must have proof and heart on this. BCH needs to keep IFP away from its protocol.

$ 0.00
User's avatar RowanSkie
3 years ago

Wao great

$ 0.00
User's avatar Aleem
3 years ago
About us Rules What is Bitcoin Cash? Affiliate program Get sponsored Self-host hello@read.cash