@NamotoSakatoshi

@NamotoSakatoshi 18 April 2021

Goodbye BTC I'm not an early adopter, neither a big holder. I knew about Bitcoin in 2016, but didn't bought any amount of it until February 2017. I entered because I liked the idea. This kind of electronic cash not controled by governments and central banks was mindblowing for me. I understood inmediately what that could mean for people, for freedom, and also for BTC price. I started using it to send money to my family, because It was fast, easy, and cheap! Later I knew about the block size conflict, something I didn't undestand at first. But late 2017 BTC's network fees rised a lot and I understood what a 1mb block limit meant. I saw why BTC wasn't good money anymore as it used to be, and sofered that in my own wallet. I had to stop using it for remittances. I've been waiting for a miracle since then. LN at last ready for masive adoption, those eternal eighteen months ending at last. Or the developing team changing their minds and rising the block size. Or perhaps Axa geting rid of Blockstream because the absence of the expected results for their shareholders, leading to radical changes in developement. But nothing happens in this big dark BTC side anymore. It seems nothing will change. I feel completely disappointed. I only see moon, when lambo, bank friendship, unkept promises, and censorship. Main developers and leaders seem to spend more time in twitter, reddit and other Social networks than working. The only important things seem to be price and propaganda. Everything seems to be tied and frozen in the BTC side of Bitcoin. So I won't wait any longer, I'm sorry. Nobody can wait forever and I've already waited too much. BCH has gave me back hope that one day Bitcoin will be P2P money for everybody. BCH is in fact the Bitcoin I wanted, the same Bitcoin I used for the fist time. Besides this, new and amazing things are being build on the BCH chain. I'm not the whole market and don't mean to represent anybody. Just, I've seen and judged by myself. And here is my sentence. I don't even want to hear about those toxic BTC advocates trolling anyone who thinks differently, not anymore. I respect and tolerate any sensible BTC advocates, but now there is only one Bitcoin for me, and that's Bitcoin Cash. Because Bitcoin was, is, and will always be cash. That's what I was told when I purchased BTC for the first time and I took that statement as the most important point of a contract between Bitcoin and me, a contract that has been awkwardly breached. Bitcoin can also be many other things, but it must be money. I don't want to hold any cryptocurrency useless as cash, so I have exchanged all my BTC for Bitcoin Cash. Because Bitcoin BCH is P2P electronic CASH, as Bitcoin was always meant to be. Everyone looks out for their own interests, but there are very different approaches to do so. You can keep watching your holdings and think that only price matters, or you can choose P2P cash for the entire world, because if it succedes it will be good for you and also for everybody else. I have made my choice. I don't care about prices anymore. I don't even mind if BCH goes to zero and BTC to the moon, as some would like. I'm ready to lose my small BCH holds if the project fails, and I'll be happy being poor if it happens. I don't want to be rich at any price. I want to be rewarded by the market only if that reward is given to me for doing what is right. I'm fed up of all that BTC bullying narrative. I'm very sorry BTC hodlers, I have nothing against you and don't mean to hurt you in any way. I wish you all the best, but I Just can't hold this big bag of toxic lies any longer. I won't even hold BTC to diversify my small investments anymore, because BTC stinks. This all has become disgusting for me, so I must go. If anyone reading this feels like me, I encourage him to do the same and write his own good bye letter. Good luck, freedom, and peace for you all, whether your support BCH, ETH, BTC or any other thing.

@NamotoSakatoshi 15 March 2021

Por qué el mercado de tarifas de BTC no tiene sentido El llamado “mercado de tarifas” en BTC no es un mercado, ni nada que se le parezca. En un mercado real, cuando la demanda aumenta en relación con la oferta, el precio también sube. Pero los suministradores reaccionan inmediatamente al incentivo que supone este aumento de precios, produciendo o importando más cantidad del bien y poniéndolo a disposición de la demanda adicional. Esto vuelve a presionar los precios a la baja y hace que el bien vuelva a ser asequible en el menor tiempo posible. Sin embargo, el "mercado" de tarifas de BTC no funciona así. Hay un límite máximo a la cantidad del bien disponible por unidad de tiempo. Eso significa que nadie puede aumentar la oferta aunque el precio suba. Los licitantes compiten por un bien cuya oferta está limitada artificialmente, y subir el precio no resuelve el problema. En otras palabras, los que pueden o están dispuestos a pagar precios más altos obtienen el bien a costa de expulsar a los demás. Entonces, el exceso de demanda sólo puede reaccionar de estas formas concretas 1) Pagando una tarifa aún más alta y contribuyendo al aumento del precio. 2) Retrasando la transacción hasta que se reduzcan las tasas. 3) Realizando la transacción con un activo diferente. Si red LN fuera una solución aceptable para el mercado, cada vez que vemos que las tasas aumentan habría un aumento de las transacciones en LN, la red de BTC se desahogaría y las tarifas se reducirían inmediatamente. Sin embargo esto no ocurre, lo que nos indica que el mercado no considera que el servicio prestado por LN pueda sustituir al que ofrece la blockchain de BTC. Las tasas se vuelven a reducir sólo después de algún tiempo, en la medida en que entren menos transacciones de las que se minan, simplemente. Así que la solución más sensata es utilizar un activo diferente con menores costes de transacción, como Bitcoin Cash, en sustitución de BTC.

@NamotoSakatoshi 15 March 2021

Why the BTC fee market makes no sense The so-called fee market in BTC is not a market, nor anything like that. In a real market, when demand increases relative to supply the price also goes up. But the suppliers immediately react to the incentive that this price increase implies, by producing or importing more of the good and making it available to the additional demand. This again puts downward pressure on prices and makes the good affordable again in the shortest possible time. However, BTC fees “market” does not work that way. There is a maximum limit to the amount of the good available per unit of time. That means that no one can increase supply even if the price goes up. Bidders compete for a good whose supply is artificially limited, and raising the price does not solve the problem. In other words, those who are able or willing to pay higher rates obtain the good at the cost of driving out others. Then the surplus demand can only react in these specific ways: 1) By paying an even higher fee and contributing to the price increase. 2) By delaying the transaction until the fees are reduced. 3) By making the transaction with a different asset. If LN were an acceptable solution for the market, every time we see fees increase there would be an increase in LN transactions, the BTC network would be unburdened and fees would be immediately reduced. However this does not happen, which tells us that the market does not see the service provided by LN as being able to replace that provided by the BTC blockchain. The fees are reduced again only after some time, to the extent that fewer transactions come in than are mined, simply. So, the most sensible solution is to use a different asset with lower transaction costs, like Bitcoin Cash, replacing BTC.