Why I'm betting on BCHA

9 536
Avatar for Cain
Written by
3 years ago
Topics: Cryptocurrency

Tuesday, December 8th, 2020

After having been a part of the Bitcoin Cash community for the better part of three years, I came to a realization that it's not about merchant adoption, or tipping your waiter or Uber driver BCH and thinking it's going to spread like wildfire until one day the entire world is using BCH on a daily basis.

I'm sorry, but I don't see it. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with trying to get merchants to accept your favorite crypto, or to host meet-ups to introduce it to others, but to me, that's not what's going to get us to the promised land.

Bitcoin took off first and foremost because of the technology. It wasn't because of voluntarists, ancaps, or libertarians. It was because for the first time in history, we had a means to transact with one another over the internet using this decentralized network that allowed you to avoid having to use a bank, or Paypal, or any other third party. Transactions were cheap, and private, and virtually instantaneous. And while communities formed around this new magical technology, the communities had nothing to do with its creation. They may have helped spread the word and onboard more people to the movement, but there would be no movement without the technology itself. Ask yourself this, when's the last time you found yourself using a new technology or service because of the community?

The main reason Bitcoin is so valuable today is because of all the people speculating on what it could be worth in the future. It's not a bad bet, even with all its flaws Bitcoin is proving to be far better at storing value than say the US Dollar.

But I think the store of value/digital gold meme can only take you so far. I think we're past the point of telling people what's possible and it's finally time to start showing them what's achievable. Over the past few years I feel like almost nothing has changed in this industry. BCH supporters continue to think all you need to do is onboard more people and businesses and eventually we're going to reach some tipping point. Basically, according to them, we haven't been shilling hard enough. They think what we need are more commercials. I think we need better tech.

I believe the reason this industry is still where it is today isn't because of poor marketing, it's because the tech is still lagging. As someone who probably used BCH more than just about anyone, I can tell you it still has a ton of limitations that would make it impossible to use if it were to suddenly go mainstream. And those limitations aren't going to be solved by slowing down the upgrade schedule, or refusing to pay developers what they're worth.

I'm putting my money on BCHA succeeding because I believe we finally have a project focused on solving the right problems. While others want to slow down, Bitcoin ABC is focused on ramping things up.

Recently it was reported that Bitmain ended their sponsorship of Bitcoin Core developers Jonas Schnelli and Jaoa Barbosa. I don't know what led to this decision, but I couldn't help wondering if it was because Bitmain no longer wanted to fund development while the rest of the industry benefited for free.

Historically, there has been no way for Bitcoin protocol developers to profit directly off the network they were helping to build. The coinbase reward was always reserved solely for the miners, but does that mean it was always intended to stay that way?

Just as many of us believe the 1 MB block size limit was a temporary measure put in place until it could be lifted, I believe the coinbase reward going 100% to the miners could be seen the same way, and that the new coinbase rule implemented by Bitcoin ABC was just waiting for the right moment to come along.

In BCHA, I feel like for the first time in the history of Bitcoin, we have the right incentives, to attract the right developers, to focus on the right problems.

Bitcoin took off for the same reason internet companies took off in the nineties. Because everyone saw the potential. But after the dot-com bubble burst, it was the companies that managed to solve actual problems that created real wealth. I think it's time for Bitcoin to enter the next phase, and my money's on BCHA leading the way.

10
$ 5.02
$ 2.02 from @TheRandomRewarder
$ 1.00 from @Mel
$ 1.00 from @School47
+ 2
Avatar for Cain
Written by
3 years ago
Topics: Cryptocurrency

Comments

I agree with the logic of this article about funding and the need for better development successes. I think scaling is all we really need to return to the Bitcoin path of 2017. User-friendly apps are needed and I believe they would get built much quicker if we could scale.

Anyway, BCH(N) does claim they are working on scaling just like BCHA says they are. So, time will tell which project will really solve scaling first. BCH(N) had great funding and volunteerism during the attacks on ABC, but I do not know if that positive energy will last now that the battle has ended.

I do like the reliable-funding model BCHA is trying to implement, but unless they get miner and community support it seems like they may lack the funding needed to do the development. I have not been following recent discussions so I may be unaware of their current funding levels or other support.

I still hope both projects get a chance to test their approaches. I consider the recent miner-attacks on BCHA to be attacks on BCH. I would guess the miner is anti-BCH and is likely to look for ways to harm BCH(N) if successful at destroying BCHA.

$ 0.50
3 years ago

Bitcoin took off originally because of one fantastic use case... Silk road. There was no other way to transact privately online. Today DNMs use BTC (crippled by transaction fees to the point of not being anonymizable) and Monero (complicated and not traded on most large exchanges). There's room for improvement, and either BCH or BCHA could do it with CashFusion.

The way I see it, the only way to success is to get a USP, and the only USP left to claim is the original one that today's BTC can't do well anymore. Whichever chain gets a DNM with CashFusion (or similar) built right in will be the winner. It's the only USP I can think of besides sound, global money, which like you said is not going to be reached by getting normal merchants onboard one at a time. They have too many other options.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Mel
3 years ago

Well, the darknet is nice, but if we get a true global scaling solution a variety of events can trigger viral growth that dwarfs all current adoption efforts and any DNM. We already did the stepping stone thing and it worked. I think the people are primed and we just need scaling and a killer game or something everyone wants to try.

$ 0.00
3 years ago

I almost mentioned Silkroad in my article. I agree that being able to transact on dark net markets is a unique selling proposition but BCHA's goal is to become world money. Anything short of that would be a failure in my opinion.

$ 0.00
3 years ago

For sure! I'm thinking of the DNMs as a stepping stone to get there.

$ 0.00
User's avatar Mel
3 years ago

"The main reason Bitcoin is so valuable today is because of all the people speculating on what it could be worth in the future."

It is ironic this is coming from you considering that so far the only legitimate reason to support BCHA is for exactly this reason. Granted, that risk could be justified, but as it stands now there is yet to be a tangible difference between BCHA and BCH. Your support of BCHA is quite literally "speculation on what it could be worth in the future." You could pivot to an argument of "better culture, better incentives..." but that's all secondary to what was supposedly the reason for the split. Financing and technical implementation. Without rehashing the discussion, it seems that financing may not have been so bloody pressing that we needed a hardcoded redirect of payment by November 15th and some of the technical arguments fall a bit flat (remember when people bandied around "For Grasburg!" for weeks, until it became wholly irrelevant at the drop of a hat?)


"BCH supporters continue to think all you need to do is onboard more people and businesses and eventually we're going to reach some tipping point. Basically, according to them, we haven't been shilling hard enough. They think what we need are more commercials. I think we need better tech.

I believe the reason this industry is still where it is today isn't because of poor marketing, it's because the tech is still lagging."

This is wrong. Not totally, but enough that you should probably step a bit outside of your echochamber and rethink things. And the way you say "They think we need more commercials. I think we need better tech" may be persuasive for literary content, but is a complete disservice to the situation you're trying to describe. Many supporters of BCH believe that genuine, real use-case adoption is part of the answer (I even wrote about it in my article which you linked, more on that later...). But it is not the whole answer. Take this as a compliment, it means you're ahead of the curve. Most people have no idea what they even need crypto for beyond either as a meme, speculation, or to feel "current". Crypto twitter might feel huge, but relative to world adoption it's nothing. I would encourage you to gain insight from "Crossing the Chasm".
To put it succinctly: https://f.hubspotusercontent20.net/hubfs/7291028/Imported_Blog_Media/crossing-the-chasm-adoption-curve.png

Make no mistake. "Shilling", as you percieve it, is merely part of the complicated navigation to mainstream adoption. I'm totally against seeing BCH marketed as something it isn't, or promising abilities and solutions it can't offer. There's no question that the tech has a long way to go and a lack of excitement, especially due to the uncertainty of the split, only put us back farther, potentially setting BCH back to a point it can't recover from. But to deny the reality of adoption is what also has us in this situation in the first place. People don't just need to see the benefits of a product, sometimes they need it handed to them on a silver platter. It is what it is. In fact, some on "your side" have alluded to the yet untapped potential of a total rebranding and the freedom it can offer in gaining traction for BCHA. So is it important or not? I'd suggest you stop being so one-sided about a lot of these issues...


Which brings me to my final point. I saw you shared my article on Twitter! Thanks! Unfortunately for me, I didn't get any tips from it, or even so much as a comment on the article... Instead what I saw was a group of people make jokes about soy and being a crazy ex girlfriend. Clearly they either didn't read the article or didn't care enough to give even half an effort to address it. That's fine, but it's a bit of a farce to write article after tweet after article glorifying BCHA and calling the BCH community a Bitshevik majority of bad culture. As if life wasn't strange enough- Amaury's pinned tweet is about the strength of BCHA's community and in terms of cohesiveness, I have yet to see such a homogenous group as the one you so adamently subscribe to.

I'll end with this. I'm not trying to make friends here (though I don't think thats a terrible side effect). I will be as transparent as I feel necessary. When that means writing an article about bringing Amaury back (which was rather meta, as i'm sure you understood, but whatever), I'll do it. When it means writing an extra long comment that you'll probably pay no mind to, I'll do it. Like you, these things matter to me. Unlike you, I never allow myself to get too comfortable. I've commented on one of your articles before. I respect you, but your content reeks of a loyalty that borders irrationality. You alone can decide what values matter to you and how you let them play out. I'm always open to sincere discussion. If BCHA manages to succeed and with a much larger advantage, despite my reservations I will join you (as will many). As things are that doesn't seem like it will be the case. And BCH is meant to be for everyone, so when you decide to come down a bit from your canopy we'll still be here. Cheers, Mono

$ 0.00
3 years ago

"The main reason Bitcoin is so valuable today is because of all the people speculating on what it could be worth in the future."

I think you misinterpreted this sentence. I agree that my support of BCHA is due to speculation. I'm speculating BCHA will be worth more than BCH in the long run due to the incentives and the people working on the project. As for financing, where do you get that it wasn't pressing? I don't see the flipstarters as being sufficient, not by a longshot.

I also don't think I'm in an echo chamber. If anything I'm creating my own echo chamber. I don't see anyone else writing pro-BCHA articles.

As for shilling, I agree it's all part of it. My articles are shilling as well. But my point is that shilling is secondary to the tech, and I think BCH is more focused on shilling than the tech.

I wasn't really sure what you meant by one-sided. If you mean one-sided in favor of BCHA, that's cuz the BCHA ethos happens to lie up exactly with my own. That could change, of course, but for now, we seem to be pretty much in perfect alignment.

Sorry about the reactions to your article. I'm guessing most people assumed I wrote it so they were just triggered. Also not sure what you mean by my articles and tweets being a farce. I support what I believe in, that is all.

Last but not least, I would argue my loyalty has nothing to do with why I write these articles. I do so because I bought a lot of BCHA and I want others to buy and make it more valuable. And I bought BCHA not to pump and dump but because I believe in what it stands for and its chances for success.

$ 0.00
3 years ago

it seems that financing may not have been so bloody pressing

That's what the anti-BCH social engineering teams are telling us every day. You seem to believe many of their claims. Time will tell if BCH actually needed reliable developer funding. So far I still see no team offering to take over the workload ABC was doing for BCH. The trolls tell us 'no worries' BCH need not do all that work anymore.

$ 0.00
3 years ago

So you don't care about merchant adoption anymore, just tech? Well BCHABC has no tech at the moment.

Why not come to AVAX, where we have state of the art tech? We have Avalanche consensus, smart contracts, custom subnetworks, etc...

$ 0.00
3 years ago