In addition to BCH, there are currently about 10 currencies on the market that are about to be halved or cut. Among these reduced production currencies, BCH is the currency with the highest market capitalization in addition to BTC, and its increase has also reached about 87% in the past month.
In addition, when talking about BCH, I have to mention its relationship with BTC and BSV. In the middle, it involves Wu Jihan of Bitmain, CSW of Aomoto and so on.
From the beginning of the year to now, BCH has risen by about 87%, but compared to BSV, ETC, DASH and other production-reducing currencies, the increase in BCH is relatively Lower. Then the question comes. The first question is what are the reasons for the rise in BCH? The second question is, how much room for BCH to rise before the halving comes, or do investors still have a chance?
Cryptocurrencies are still in their early days, and most of the value support is based on expected investment and speculative demand, so the volatility is very large, and the rise and fall of one or two months may be reversed in ten minutes. The upside and downside are also difficult to predict.
However, I am sure that the future of currency must be cryptocurrency. BCH's recent community has made more actual progress, and domestic and foreign communities are forming an effective coordination mechanism, which is a good support for prices.
Among the mainstream currencies, I think the biggest opportunity is BCH, because it has been constantly finding and solving problems on the road pioneered by Satoshi Nakamoto. Compared to the various cryptocurrencies that give up their original intentions in the face of problems, return to the starting point when they encounter problems, and discover the problems and push back to the past, BCH's pragmatic exploration route is more likely to succeed.
The rise of BCH was first repaired after falling enough, and it bottomed out after more than 2 years of bear market. The second is the mobilization and repair of investor sentiment brought by the halving market.
There is also background knowledge that the entire encrypted digital currency market is still in its early stages. Compared with the traditional financial market, the entire market is still a relatively small volume market. In this market, the decentralized currency market that will not die Welcome the advantage of liquidity in the entire market. This can also answer the second question. In this round of halving the market, BCH has at least a few times more room to rise. In April, it will be halved, which will rise to at least mid-March or the end of March.
The first question: 1 Halving is a self-fulfilling prophecy, reducing the selling pressure by half-"Coin price rises easily-" Buy coins in advance and ambush-"Coin prices really rise; 2. Recent global market relative Abundant liquidity, refer to the strong trend of U.S. stocks; 3. BSV and BCH have a certain correlation. This round of halving was initiated by the BSV boom, and some of the funds that went short will flow into BCH, which has lagged behind; 4. BCH's own Technological development.
The second problem: the opportunity still exists, the cryptocurrency market is heavily affected by the BTC trend, the BTC market has not ended, and other currencies have opportunities; the upper limit is not easy to judge, and you can see it while walking, but you can use the time dimension to assist in the judgment. Will appear before the halving.
Last year, Dan Held of the exchange's founder Kraken Exchange expressed his views on the halving of BCH, saying that halving would be catastrophic for BCH. The halving will result in less block rewards, miners will cut the computing power to BTC, the security of BCH will become lower, and 51% attacks will become very easy.
There are a large number of BTC supporters in the currency circle who are hostile to BCH, because they believe that consensus must not be split, and fork is a crime. For example, Dan Held calling BCH Bcash is a deliberate insult. These people deliberately downplayed BCH in terms of words, and their views were even more biased.
If the reward is halved, a 51% attack becomes very easy, then BTC becomes more vulnerable every four years, and the currency price drops. In fact, there is a halving market almost every time. The market value of mainstream currencies is relatively large, and attacks require large computing power, which is not easy to implement.
This is because the mining computing power is directly determined by the market value of the new currency, and it depends on two factors: the output of the new currency and the price of the currency. In December 2018, the price of BCH dropped to 71 dollar , only 1/6 of the current price. And at that time, BCH also faced a real 51% attack threat from the CSW and CA teams. But in the end they failed, 51% of the attacks did not occur, and they reluctantly chose a fork. Now some people exaggerate the risk of BCH attack by halving it, just their habit of attacking BCH daily.
In my opinion, BCH is the most experienced currency in successfully dealing with attacks on computing power after the battle for expansion and the battle of computing power.
In the 2018 battle of computing power, BCH introduced a reorganization protection mechanism for 10 blocks, making the previous threat never to fork, and the CSW team that used computing power to kill the ABC chain had to fork.
Currently, of the three currencies, only BCH has a restructuring protection mechanism. Even the exchanges that have the least confidence in BCH can also prevent 51% attacks by setting 10 strategies to confirm the recharge success. BTC and BSV do not have this mechanism, and the concepts they preach do not allow it.
The scale of BTC computing power is large, and the risk of attack is small. However, the scale of BSV's computing power is small, and the risk of being attacked by 51% is greater. However, because BSV relies on centralized control, it can roll back as many blocks as the CSW calls, which can also prevent various attacks.
Therefore, from the perspective of decentralization, BCH has the most abundant and effective experience in preventing 51% attacks. Halving does not entail any risk of a hash attack.
On the contrary, due to the battle for expansion and the battle for computing power, the current BCH community is less speculative and more pragmatic, and the profitability of related companies is relatively strong. Halving the benefits will continue to be beneficial.
But Facts have proven that it is the computing power that follows the price, not the price that follows the computing power. As long as the price of BCH does not return to zero, the computing power of BCH will not return to zero. Many currencies or public chains that are much smaller than BCH's computing power are not dead now, and BTG, which has suffered 51% attacks, is not dead, so this "catastrophic" impact is currently only a talk on paper. Imagined in my mind.
BCH is a "relatively small computing power" chain protected by large computing power. btc.com antpool viabtc bitcoin.com btc.top The vast majority of the computing power in these mining pools supports BCH. When they encounter computing power attacks, they will return from the BTC computing power to protect BCH. This is very different from other small computing power chains.
BSV and BCH will be halved before BTC. The former has already been halved, and the latter has not been halved. This is a short time window. It is likely that the mining revenue is not as good as BTC. There will be some computing power to cut BTC. 51% attack It will be easier, but it doesn't necessarily happen.
On the one hand, these two currencies have a lot of their own computing power to dig, and will not drop very much; on the other hand, even now, BTC computing power has an overwhelming advantage over BCH and BSV (currently about 112 : 4.6: 2.8), but there have been no 51% attacks, indicating that it is not economical to do so, or there is a great moral hazard.
BCH has always been considered as the public chain of Bitmain or the public chain of Wu Jihan. There is a view that even "BCH is prosperous, Bitmain is prosperous, BCH perishes, Bitmain perishes", what do you think of this? From a viewpoint, what kind of role does Bitmain play in BCH and how is it affected by BCH?
The misunderstanding that BCH is a coin that avoids cold coins, mining coins. Opponents of the expansion, mainly core proponents, attacked BCH by creating this misunderstanding, and this attack continues to the present.
Supporters of CSW also used this to attack BCH in the 2018 hashtag battle, regardless of being highly centralized.
BCH has always been regarded as the public chain of Bitmain or the public chain of Wu Jihan. This is the biggest misunderstanding or misunderstanding of the outside world.
I think BCH is obviously a highly decentralized currency, but it bears the infamous name of a centralized coin or miner coin; it bears the insult of a centralized coin or miner coin, but Did not enjoy any benefits of centralized coins. This is because Bitmain's earlier listing was unfavorable because of its listing, and the differences between the two founders on the currency and development direction.
Now that the situation is gradually clear, I hope that Bitmain can play a greater role in the development of BCH. The development of BCH is good, and it will have a great impact on the resurgence of Bitmain.
In the BCH community, besides Bitmain, what other well-known organizations or institutions are there?
There are many companies supporting BCH, especially payment companies that participated in the 2017 New York Consensus Conference. After the expansion failure, BTC's handling fee skyrocketed, and the confirmation time fluctuated too much, which made payment service companies unable to conduct business. Such as openbazaar, bitpay, purse.io, etc., they have turned to BCH payment.
And bitcoin.com can be regarded as the most famous BCH support company.
Domestic companies that explicitly support BCH include Bitmain, Viabtc, BTC.TOP, etc.
Many companies remain neutral and focus on providing support for various mainstream currencies. There are also some neutral companies that show sympathy and support for BCH. For example, in the battle of computing power, Huobi announced the end of the naming of BCHABC and BCHSV and changed it to BCH and BSV after the BCH maintained its absolute advantage over the BSV computing power.
The promotion of BCH in Australia has been very fast, and it has had a positive impact worldwide. It is dominated by the "Bitcoin cash city". They are building a complete BCH business city, including investment, mining, industrial parks, wages, consumption. , Forming a complete BCH business ecosystem.
I am more optimistic about Australia's BCH ecology. I went there once in September last year and spent BCH at the airport, which was 20% cheaper than using my credit card.
In addition to Bitmain, there are Bitcoin.com (its founder is Jesus Roger Ver), Bitpay, openbazaar, and CoinBase (Coinbase Exchange is the largest crypto digital currency exchange in North America. It was invested by Roger Ver in its early years ), Viabtc, BTC.top, BCH Ecological Fund, and the Copernicus team (Although Bitmain disbanded the development team in a bear market, the Copernicus team rewrites the BCH client in Go and the code is also open source Now, any other development team can take over these codes at any time to continue to improve.)
Also the media, Babbitt and Coin Watch are all invested by Bitmain, especially Coin Watch is very friendly to the BCH community and very helpful. As a media, it is very objective and fair, and has been promoting the correct knowledge and investment philosophy.
BCH, BSV, and BTC, in fact, have the same line. In 2017, BCH was forked from BTC, and in 2018, BSV was forked from BCH. It can be said that once everyone was a believer in BTC, why do they repeatedly split? What is the essential reason? What are the unknown details in the middle? Can you share it briefly?
The direct difference between BTC and BCH is whether to expand the block capacity, and the difference behind it is whether to adhere to the original intention of early peer-to-peer electronic cash or world currencies.
BTC chose value storage and digital gold, and BCH chose to continue to be the world currency. For the ins and outs, please refer to "The Beginning and End of the Battle for BTC Expansion". This is the largest war in the history of cryptocurrencies.
The confrontation between BCH and BSV should not have emerged. This is a political struggle carefully planned by several ambitionists, taking advantage of the weaknesses of immature decentralized communities. After the split, BCH chose to continue to explore forward, while BSV chose to go backwards, even religiously, in a centralized way.
Looking at the two forks together, the root cause is that the Satoshi Nakamoto framework established a basic economic model and security framework for a decentralized cryptocurrency, but it is not perfect.
After entering the mainstream society, the problems of Satoshi Nakamoto's framework have been exposed. In response to these problems, BCH explores in accordance with market demand. BTC lost its confidence in payment after the expansion dispute, turned to value storage, and focused on investment products. BSV did not acknowledge the existence of the problem, deified the framework of Satoshi Nakamoto, and blamed the problem on practitioners.
The fork of BSV is a common routine in the capital market. There is nothing new under the sun. It is nothing more than the time for the development of the encrypted digital currency field to begin to involve the capital market in a large scale.
Core hopes to maintain the stability of the underlying network and expand the capacity through Layer 2 networks such as the Lightning Network. BCH believes that this will make the problem more complicated (in fact, it is also very complicated and has not yet been commercialized). It hopes to directly change the block capacity limit. Therefore, there was the first fork; then during the development of BCH, the BSV route hoped to expand the capacity in one step, directly changed to no upper limit, and insisted on restoring the original framework of Satoshi Nakamoto; the original route of BCH hoped to gradually expand capacity (considering To the network environment and actual usage rate), and added smart contract and other functions, so there was a second fork.
How is the current path of BCH different from BTC and BSV? What are the advantages of BCH and what are the problems?
On the premise of adhering to the world currency dream, BCH is more sober and pragmatic. After two wars, the community has become more mature and rational.
The main problem facing BCH is the governance of decentralized communities. This problem was fully exposed in the battle of computing power. In less than half a year, the BCH community suffered heavy losses in attacks launched by the CSW team. After the end of the computing war, there is still no effective governance mechanism.
The infrastructure funding scheme recently proposed by Jiang Zhuoer is an important breakthrough. He joined Wu Jihan, Roger, and Yang Haipo to propose this solution, and was supported by important development teams such as Bitcoin ABC and Electron cash. Shows that the community has taken the issue seriously and is determined to address it.
The biggest difference between the path taken by BCH and BTC is that it insists on “expanding capacity”. BTC does not expand, so it deviates from the direction of "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" determined by Satoshi Nakamoto and the BTC white paper title. The focus here is on the Cash System. BTC insists on no expansion, congestion in transfers, and high fees, so it can only do “digital gold” value storage, which departs from the Cash System. BCH chose to expand. From its name, Bitcoin Cash, it knew that it adhered to the true Satoshi vision, a Cash system. The biggest difference from BSV can be referred to in the long text of the teacher in the previous question.
BCH ROADMAP
This official roadmap is both clear and detailed.
BCH Roadmap: The goal of BCH is to be a reliable source of money for everyone in the world. This is a technology that changes civilization and will greatly enhance human freedom and prosperity.
This roadmap aims to provide high-level technical guidance and enable different technical teams to work together to advance the common goals of BCH. The developer's responsibility in achieving this goal is to produce high-quality, highly professional software that meets the needs of its users, miners, and merchants. We are committed to continuous technical improvement to produce reliable products and provide a solid foundation for the development of BCH.
The basic design of BCH is reasonable. However, this does not mean that it is perfect. A stable approach is to gradually improve the system through technically sound design and careful engineering. Through continuous optimization and protocol upgrades, the scale of application of peer-to-peer digital cash will expand to many orders of magnitude beyond the current scale. The necessary technical improvements can be divided into three categories:
Enables BCH to expand from approximately 100 Tx / s to more than 5,000,000 Tx / s. Protocol improvements must be made to enable large-scale parallelization of this scale transaction processing.
Improve the payment experience and ensure it's instant and reliable. The transaction should be verified within three seconds.
Make BCH scalable. Extensible protocols make future improvements less disruptive and provide a solid foundation for businesses and developers.
To be a solid foundation for application development and innovation, BCH must continuously improve and compete. Through cooperation, we can build a technology foundation platform to make BCH the best currency ever in the world.
There is no arrogance in it, and no Premier League beauty. It is a very practical goal. That is down to earth and looking at the stars.
The advantages of BCH are supported by the powerful computing power of Bitmain, a high-quality development team and community, and its smart contract function is also unique in the fork coin series. The problem that is currently related to Bitmain's own development may be one. How to coordinate the relationship between the founding team and the community and balance the interests of all parties is a complex governance issue. The Ethereum community has done DAO for so many years The idea also failed to land.
The other is the peer-to-peer electronic cash system. How to compete with the existing currency system, in addition to technical issues, there are also political barriers that are difficult to overcome.
This is also a huge challenge for BCH to realize its vision.
"BCH Infrastructure Financing Plan" proposed by Jiang Zhuoer. In fact, this plan has also attracted a lot of people's attention. Everyone knows that financing is to raise funds for the development of the public chain. funds. Does this plan indicate that the development of BCH is actually facing a financial dilemma compared to BSV's "thin wealth"?
This plan is an important step for BCH to dare to face problems and try to solve them. Decentralized communities are also social groups. There are always some public affairs that need to be organized (the most direct is development), and some major decisions require a decision-making mechanism. The first step in doing these things is to have some basic public funds. BCH previously relied primarily on voluntary contributions to support public affairs.
But cryptocurrency is a typical business system, and the donation model has encountered many problems, not a long-term solution. This plan shows that the community is willing to make some breakthrough attempts, and BCH is still a pragmatic and dynamic community.
BSV does not play decentralized cryptocurrencies, but financial manipulation. Most of the money he invested is invested in his own company. BSV is a very centralized "company coin". Compared with this, the problem of BCH developers' development funding is precisely the result of "decentralization".
BCH can't talk about a core team. BCH belongs to the entire community. The development of BCH is sponsored by the community. At present, there are mainly 6 development teams responsible for development. The 6 development teams are different from each other in competition and complement each other.
Those who know BCH should know that BCH is really practicing "decentralization". It is precisely the practice of decentralization. So, not only enjoy the benefits of decentralization, but also the disadvantages of decentralization.
Regarding the "BCH Infrastructure Financing Plan" proposed by Jiang, my opinion is relatively neutral. Whether or not they can be implemented is at least a kind of exploration and attempt.
In the middle of last year, the BCH community once conducted a fundraising and it worked well.
As to whether this fundraising method can last, it also depends on the development of the community and the rise of the currency price.
The background of this matter is: public chain development requires money, but the various development teams of BCH have not previously raised funds through ICO, pre-mining and other methods. The content of the plan is to add a proposal to the BCH May upgrade to donate 12.5% of BCH's block rewards in the next 6 months to developers, which can be understood as a tax draw. Dash, Zcash, etc. also use this method .
The starting point is no problem, but the implementation method is controversial, and the details of the plan are being revised. This is also a disadvantage of decentralization, and it is difficult to balance the interests of all parties.
To be efficient on a fair basis, no project is currently doing well. The digital currency has been developed for more than ten years, but in fact, there is no special breakthrough.
Let's return to the topic of halving. At present, the currency to be halved or the output reduced by 2020 will increase more or less. Can we say that the "half quotation" that everyone expects has just started, or is it still Say that the halving of some currencies is actually over?
Cryptocurrency market liquidity is interlinked. The halving of the market mainly depends on the halving of BTC, which will cause the continuous significant decline in the supply of new coins in the entire market. This is the basis for halving the market.
The halving of small currencies has little effect, especially for small speculative currencies that are more speculative. The halving may cause a short-term rise, but after the price is high, funds will soon be transferred to other currencies. Value support, the concept of halving after the speculation will go down all the way.
In addition to considering market value, for currencies that have a good community development foundation and related companies or individuals with strong profitability, they will have the motivation and ability to continue to increase their holdings, which will reduce supply by half and stimulate continued price increases.
Simply put, the halving of the market depends on BTC, and on the currency of the community and industry.
What is more important than halving the market is the big bull-bear cycle. This is because cryptocurrencies mainly rely on expectations, so social sentiment is the determining factor for long-term fluctuations. A bull market will cause excessive social emotions, increase blind investment, and will inevitably fail a lot, which will lead to a bear market. The bear market will cause overestimation of social sentiment, release low-cost resources to high-quality companies, and lay the foundation for a bull market.
I am optimistic about the halving market because after 2018 and 2019, the bearish pessimism has been fully released, high-quality companies have developed very well, social positive emotions are in a benign accumulation, and the supply brought by the halving of BTC continues The decline has helped to create a bull market motivator that triggers a high social mood.
So I am optimistic about a bull market in the second half of 2020 or the first half of 2021. Halving may be the trigger, but not the root cause. The root cause lies in the mid-term bull-bear cycle and the tendency of long-term cryptocurrencies to replace traditional currencies.
In addition, it should be reminded that halving the output will halve, it will indeed bring mining disasters and hit the market. Coupled with the previous expectation of halving, there may be a drop in prices. But for the entire second half of the market, I am optimistic.
Halving is a self-fulfilling prophecy, so there must be a market. How big the market is depends on how much the market expects to halve the price in. Suppose there is only one halving currency for BTC next year, all users in the currency circle know that BTC will be halved. If there is only a game of stock funds, there will be no big market, because most people bet in advance. The price has already reflected everyone's expectations.
But in reality, there will definitely be out-of-circumferential incremental funds attracted to the market because of the halving news. How much incremental funds can be attracted is the key to how this wave of halving market is. The situation of multi-currency halving in adjacent time will be more complicated, and there is a case of playing with each other.
In addition, the output that has been dug out / the output that is not dug out is also very important. If almost all the dug out is finished, how to halve it will have little effect.
If you like this article pls retweet it @MarcDeMesel @F.B. @molecular @ColinTalksCrypto @hasson @ancient.stone @Ellie
this article is too long to read for me. the parts I randomly selected for reading were good.