I’ll keep this one short and try and point out the elephant in the room head on:
BCH is too vanilla.
It is in the middle, which can be seen as both good or bad. It has a lot going for it technically – but there are always things that can make it “just that much better”:
- Better leadership
- Better governance
- Better code review
- Better stability
- Better implementation
- Better usecases
etc.
It’s at a sweet spot in that it is conservative, but constantly looking to improve. But sprinkle in a bit more ego, excitement, and self interest and you have a coin that is primed to be “made even better.”
The death of BTC will be reversion to the mean – Such a slow and pseudo-progressive march toward adoption that it will be a novelty asset for rich people and institutions.
The death of BCH will be “death by a thousand cuts” – dwindling as each team/group seeks to pull big blocks to their edge case.
- For BSV it’s IP capture led by a false prophet.
Not much needs to be said here.
- For e-cash it’s uncompromising technical direction by a benevolent dictator.
“it’s decentralized, as long as you listen to us regarding the right chain to be mined”.
- For NEXTchain it’s “friendly” competition.
It cannot be mutual benefit if you’re trying to grow value for a mineable coin wholly detached from BCH. It is to BU’s benefit to leverage the BCH ecosystem and pitch NEXTchain as a good testing ground for user needs. Effectively, going ABC’s route of opting for specialized development, but by trying to warm an already existing community to accept it.
BCH is too vanilla.
That could be a great thing, but big blockers have chosen to spit in the well they drink from. It is in anyone and everyone’s power to pursue their own interests, but ask yourselves – at what cost? You think 99.9% of coins will die, but within the PoW big block community you’re sure yours will “be the one”? I have yet to see a compelling argument as to why BU couldn’t create a mineable token or help smartBCH in their efforts and then build within that; this would incentivise usage in BCH, smartBCH, and get less contentious consensus around a development blockchain.
Yes, BTC is a cult. Yes, they’ve totally lost sight of what they’re actually trying to accomplish. But they’re scaling mind share. For any money to be money, you need mind share. The worst outcome is that BTC “wins” for all the wrong reasons. As it stands, that’s what is happening. PoW is losing the fight – BTC is the wrong product, but it is delivering. BCH (and all its forks, inspired projects, etc.) may have the right product, but it isn’t delivering. If this keeps up, ETH really is growing stronger as the only practical competition.
Unfortunately, the age of memes has taken over public discourse. It’s unsustainable and will cause more problems than it solves, but that’s another discussion. The point is that splitting, forking, recreating, etc. creates pauses and unpredictability. The last thing a meme does is slow down and confuse. It is simple, compact, and easily deliverable. We’re weakening BCH in the public markets.
I wish BU well in their project, but something tells me the homepage for it will not stay this way for long…
(The rationale will be something like “with time, we’ve seen that NEXTchain has grown to take on unique characteristics that have made it different enough and special in it’s own right”)
I’ll keep this up for the sake of accountability.
I recommend the BU team really ask themselves "What possible ends will this achieve? What are the chances of each one happening?" BCH is a force to be reckoned with...but leaders have time and time again preferred to experiment over organize. This is not getting us where we want to go.
Cheers,
Mono
