Join and earn Bitcoin Cash for participation

BCH in 2020 - trout's Perspective

27 446 exc boost
Avatar for trout
Written by   40
5 days ago (Last updated: 1 hour ago)

How Did We Get Here?

People, at the individual level, experience frustration when their expectations are not met. Sometimes these expectations are reasonable, and sometimes they are not. Either way, it does not change the outcome, which is the feeling of frustration.

I see a lot of frustration being expressed by the BCH community. Their expectations are not being met.

From my perspective, it appears that most people in the community expect development to proceed with input from that community. They expect that changes will be debated, weighed on their merit, and integrated after some eloquent majority agrees the change is worthwhile. 

This expectation is not being met, and frustration is the result. The reason these expectations are not being met, is because they do not reflect reality.

The Landscape I See

The reality is that a Bitcoin ecosystem functions through three opposing forces: Miners, Developers, and the Market (composed of exchanges, users, and merchants).

Amaury is the lead developer of ABC. 97% of miners run ABC software. Exchanges and businesses using BCH require reliable software that is ‘good enough’, which ABC provides. None of these relationships require input or direction from the ‘community’.

There is a cognitive dissonance playing itself out through the BCH ecosystem. On the one hand, the financial and business success of the cryptocurrency with the ticker ‘BCH’ requires that it stick to the roadmap, be reliable in its functionality (which requires reliable funding), and ultimately sticks to the narrative of ‘digital cash for the world’.

On the other hand, there is a vibrant community of anarchocapitalists, cypherpunks, libertarians, and freedom-loving ‘weirdos’ that want to hack and tinker with all that is possible with new cryptocurrency ideas. They are not willing to be dictated to. They are not willing to accept limitations or people with power. I love this community. I am part of it. I have many friends in the community. But this community is not necessary for the success of BCH.

There should be a symbiotic relationship between the community and the business forces. But that relationship is broken.

These are opposing ideals, trying to exist within a single ecosystem. This is the source of the cognitive dissonance, the source of unmet expectations, and the source of frustration.


The frustration will continue, it will build further, until some form of relief is found.


Now, the chance of miners capitulating and running something other than ABC software is pretty low. The chance of exchanges and merchants giving the BCH ticker symbol to something other than the current chain, is pretty low. And the chance of Amaury finding a better way to interface with the community is pretty low. And so the frustration will continue to build.

The only way out of this conundrum that I can see, is to create a new chain, and a new ticker for it. A new place for the community to have its expectations met. Because they will never have them met on the BCH chain.

The only thing holding the community back is the price and the ticker symbol. Many can not stomach the thought of building a new chain. They would rather fight over the existing ticker symbol than start something new.

And so, the fighting will probably continue for the foreseeable future. But from my perspective, the community will not win, and the fighting and frustration will continue, until enough members of that community create a new chain that embodies their ideals.

Moving Forward

I wish I didn’t have to write these words. I wish this wasn’t the conclusion I was forced to draw. I wish we could restore the symbiotic relationship between ‘successful business’ and ‘happy community’. But as a pragmatic person trying to build a business in this space, I have to dispassionately assess the forces and landscape before me. Wishing doesn’t do any good.

I will continue to build on and support ABC. I think they produce reliable software, a foundation which enables me to solve business problems for my clients.

And if another chain was to emerge, I would support that too. FullStack.cash would actively build tools to support the growth of that new chain.


69
$ 18.61
$ 5.00 from @Cain
$ 5.00 from @TobiasRuck
$ 1.28 from @sanctuary.the-one-law
+ 17
Avatar for trout
Written by   40
5 days ago (Last updated: 1 hour ago)
Enjoyed this article?  Earn Bitcoin Cash by sharing it! Explain
...and you will also help the author collect more tips.

Comments

How to earn more bch sir Because I really need money Sir can anyone please Huhhhh Wla na vba

Jan taga pilipinas Po ksi ako Mahirap lng

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Interesting take. I agree with most of what you're saying, but you made some comments that I think aren't necessarily reflective and I'd like to offer my $0.02:

The only way out of this conundrum that I can see, is to create a new chain, and a new ticker for it. A new place for the community to have its expectations met. Because they will never have them met on the BCH chain. The only thing holding the community back is the price and the ticker symbol. Many can not stomach the thought of building a new chain. They would rather fight over the existing ticker symbol than start something new.

This isn't a sound argument. I know you mean well, but it's implication cannot be taken seriously. You're effectively providing a solution that, for the sake of brevity, amounts to this: "Whoever wants a crypto sandbox to pitch suggestions and wrestle with ideas can go off and do it on a new chain. One which will be free to be dictated by community pursuits...but which will obviously not meet "market" demands and be nothing more than a hobby project to play with. That's fine, but come to terms with the fact that BCH will not become that hobby project (and neither will we let its standing in the market)."

BUT THAT'S NOT A SOLUTION. It's an easy way to carve out part of the community that you feel is stunting progress. Nothing more.

Now, the chance of miners capitulating and running something other than ABC software is pretty low. The chance of exchanges and merchants giving the BCH ticker symbol to something other than the current chain, is pretty low. And the chance of Amaury finding a better way to interface with the community is pretty low. And so the frustration will continue to build.

Why not add a few more lines? (my hunch is because you don't believe these "chances" are reflective of what you consider to be the objective reality of the situation) "If many of our community members (businesses, developers, etc.) leave, the chances of BCH making the near term progress it needs, especially in terms of adoption, is low." "Without a diverse ecosystem of people, nodes, and businesses creating the collective BCH, the chances of a universal p2p cash is low." I think you see how this tips the scale from your solution being the only I could go on...

Let's try and boil it down as simplistically as possible: It feels like there are two "camps" forming.

  1. Bitcoin ABC & friends
  2. The underrepresented community fighters

---Bitcoin ABC & friends:---

+Very strong in the "getting things done" aspect of building.

+Provide quality and stability, with innovation from a technical perspective

-Maybe not the best at communicating

-A bit more "in their own head"

---The underrepresented community fighters:---

+Pretty capable technical skills

+Provide a diverse range of "views" and able to represent/communicate different facets of what can be a more antifragile userbase

-Spread out, to the point that the direction of the roadmap can easily be lost within the noise

-Less focused on the competition, which could cause BCH to lag behind in its ultimate goal

If you ask me, these two groups can actually provide a lot of benefit to eachother. I think the real problem is that they've gotten to comfortable in their own camp.

And I believe the real solution is to make them both uncomfortable in their own camp (in a productive way).

So what could that look like? Well, it could be a lot of things. I think Shammah's meme competition was a great start. I also think having (relatively) impartial intermediaries can help keep the two sides in check, helping them understand the other side's perspective without constantly feeling attacked. It could even mean more interpersonal contact because yes, we are human. Sometimes its easy to forget the person you're tweeting about or quoting is also a human, one you might even get along with in a non-work-related setting. Maybe have a "bi-monthly check in" where the Zoom conference is just to discuss things within the cryptosphere, what developers are working on or thinking about, etc.

This probably sounds very lovey-dovey and uneccessary. "It'll never work." I think that's the uncomfortable aspect of it kicking in. It feels like wasted time because it's exactly what BOTH SIDES WOULD PREFER NOT TO DO. That cannot be overstated. I don't expect people to suddenly become the best of friends. They don't even have to necessarily like them. But they should make a real effort to respect them. And both sides have come off the tracks and are fueling a negative feedback loop.

These are opposing ideals, trying to exist within a single ecosystem. [...] The frustration will continue, it will build further, until some form of relief is found.

So let's not throw our hands up! Let's try and find pragmatic solutions. If we see that even those don't work (after giving them a real chance), i'll be one of the first to try and mediate a split (again: I think both sides will lose if there is a split, I do not believe it to be wise, at all.)

I hope both sides will find it in their heart not to hate me, but it needs to be said- Bitcoin ABC & friends: You guys are great. You're hyperfocused on the mission and you're delivering. Daily. Not only do I not loathe Amaury, I even like him. I think he's a good technical leader. But he needs to come down to earth. He needs to realize that being more receptive to people and ideas does not make him a worse programmer, but a more effective doer and an even better person. Friends, somtimes you need to get off your high horse. Not everything has to be done with a snarky tweet or a philosophical rant about economics or evolutionary psychology. If you're really about using your intelligence to make the world a better place, do it. And you can't ignore the very real interpersonal element that's part of making the world a better place.

The underrepresented community fighters: You want voices to be heard. Some of those voices have good things to add. Heck, even great things to add. But some people can sometimes add too much that it's impractical, or not enough that it's useless. You need to either work on channeling all you have to offer in a better way, or know when to effectively rally around the right causes. Bitcoin ABC is not the enemy or the piece of BCH that will cause us not to succeed. They are a strong asset that needs to be utilized well (and they need to understand that as well, see above). How can you be so confident you're the cure for BCH when your best efforts seem to lean towards causing it to divide? Do better.

I'll end with a meme. (shoutout to Shammah) https://read.cash/edit/61b39e53

Cheers, Mono

$ 0.10
4 days ago

Some great feedback there. Thank you!

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Is what you suggest is to simply take the code
and start with a new genesis block (and DAA [+ wire + etc...]) ?
That would work for some of us,
with no drama at all.


You might be surprised at how far and how fast that could accelerate.

$ 0.50
5 days ago

Preferably also no SHA-256

$ 0.05
5 days ago

++ Just my 2sats worth would be to suggest:

  1. start as a friendly 'hobby' offshoot instead of some 'BCH' drama effort.
  2. Aim at a quiet, uneventful launch with only interested parties.
  3. Lose the halving drama (use a single coin per block reward, eternally)
    since by the time the chain matures one coin may not be worth the drama anyway.
    (All a single coin would eventually do is replace lost/abandoned/burnt coins.)
  4. Establish a -minimal- fundamental list of goals that everyone agrees to strive for.
  5. Just do it, anyway - it is not as if it costs that much money to spool up a few nodes.
  6. One immediate use-case that could generate income would be [not telling you here!]
$ 0.10
4 days ago

Thanks for sharing your opinion. But I disagree with some of the things you are saying. It's true that most miners run ABC, but that doesn't mean that "BCH" is Amaury-Coin. Miners could very easily switch at any moment to BCHN and the sky wouldn't fall.

The idea that BCH only exists as the delusion of grandeur of one random software engineer is utterly ridiculous. BCH is bigger than any one of us, and we have to start to act like it. The community (miners, developers, businesses, users) have to realize that if a certain person is hurting the growth and evolution of BCH, then maybe a change is needed.

I think it's funny how a large portion of this community still craves authoritarianism.

$ 0.25
5 days ago

" 97% of miners run ABC software"

Hold yourself to a higher standard than that, Chris.

That pie chart first of all says "ABC / Other", and secondly does not allow inference that 97% or any other specific percentage of miners run ABC.

The pie chart is in fact, useless nowadays because the vast majority of miners / pools are not currently signaling which node client they use.

The percentages are therefore highly misleading (not blaming coin.dance for this - if we wanted to get it more accurately we would need miners to signal but that is an almost impossible ask since they have little to gain by doing so).

Now, the chance of miners capitulating and running something other than ABC software is pretty low.

Running something other than ABC is not capitulation.

And the chances may be much higher than you actually believe.

$ 0.10
User's avatar btcfork
This user is who they claim to be.
We have manually verified this user via some other channel.
4 days ago

they have little to gain by doing so

shareholders need to pressure the executives to do a better job. Put them on BMP.

Realistically though, it would be enough to just put a default tag in all the mining software, miners wont change the defaults.

$ 0.00
4 days ago

I was not aware that the pie chart was so misleading. Thank you for pointing that out. I wish we had better data. If anyone has links, please share.

Please note also, that the point I made above is specifically for 'mining' nodes.

$ 0.10
4 days ago

I saw your Reddit comment only after I made my post.

Thanks for having an open mind about the presented data.

I wish we had better data.

Yes, it would maybe help some.

$ 0.00
User's avatar btcfork
This user is who they claim to be.
We have manually verified this user via some other channel.
4 days ago

Nice article

$ 0.00
4 days ago

do you think crypto will break all the records ever made?

$ 0.00
4 days ago

what is Fullstack.cash?

$ 0.00
4 days ago

I have no idea what is you going to be doing with you 3 and the invoice for the 3 of your teeth so I will not be happier then with a few more days to get more peace and quiet for the rest

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Nice job

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Nice

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Very agreeable and very well put. Both the fact of 'community voting' expectations not being met (never ment to be on the table in the first place) and the professional cut, before even more destructiveness happens.

Sad to see all that and also that Ancaps get a bad rep. I am a staunch Ancap, it's almost satirical and I do not share that 'community first' mindset. I think most of people, who do this are ..... wait for it... not real libertarians in the first place. 😁

$ 0.05
5 days ago

This is like owning a business and telling your customers that they are stupid and that what they want is irrelevant. You guys have lost the plot.

$ 0.00
4 days ago

There is no "you guys". There is only me, deciding on who to trust.

Read Chris Troutners article again. And if you want to 'fire ABC' so bad, start developing your own mining node OR start mining with another one or simply leave the network if you disagree with it. It is that easy. Always has been.

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Keep sharing

$ 0.00
4 days ago

For me before I became an agorist, I was heavily involved in politics(campaigns, clubs, etc.). Part of the transition process was to stop worrying about politics and focus on making contributions to increase liberty in my own life. Bitcoin Cash has been no different. I've noticed most of the people who are more focused on building BCH also keep a lighter touch on the politics. What is my opinion on the IFP, or drift correction? It doesn't matter.
What matters to me is adding value to the bitcoin cash blockchain. Staying out of the politics has enabled me to maintain good working relationships with people on both sides of the political spectrum within BCH.
Chris, I really appreciate how you're focused on building valuable tools for bitcoin cash.

$ 0.75
5 days ago

the recurring problem is people talking about developers, exchanges and community. These dont matter at all.

The reality is much simpler - in the anonymous bitcoin system only the proof of your skin in the game (stake) matters.

STAKE holders = SHARE holders + HASH holders

No-one else matters and must not matter. Until people acknowledge and accept this simple reality, there will be shit happening.

$ 0.00
4 days ago

You can invest money, or you can invest time. You can also invest social credit, or you can represent opportunity.

A stake holder does not by necessity mean a coin holder or a hasher.

A company that has no coin, no hash and no prior investement in BCH, is still a valuable member of the community if they are valuable in themselves, and are currently considering to use BCH as part of the business.

I might not be rich (coins), but I am certaintly invested (time, social credit, future opportunity).

$ 0.00
4 days ago

.. or you can invest time. You can also invest social credit, or you can represent opportunity.

all of that is easily faked. none of that can be anonymously, measurably proven over the internet. therefore irrelevant for governance, because you might be a saboteur pretending you care and are investing a lot of time. the blockstream/core gang invested a lot of time and social credit, people listened to them and it resulted in a disaster. The BSV gang faked they represent a huge opportunity - people listened to them and it ended in a disaster.

A stake holder does not by necessity mean a coin holder or a hasher

yes it does, we dont have anything else, that can be measured, anonymously proven and not easily faked.

A company that has no coin, no hash and no prior investement in BCH, is still a valuable member of the community if they are valuable in themselves, and are currently considering to use BCH as part of the business.

yes, they are valuable as any other potential customer, nothing more (otherwise we get the BSV sabotage again). Customer surveys are a great thing, but a very different thing to shareholder voting.

I might not be rich (coins), but I am certaintly invested (time, social credit, future opportunity).

yes i know, you are one of the best we have. as soon as the holders parliament is up i will delegate the voting power of my coins to you.

$ 0.00
4 days ago

Nice

$ 0.00
4 days ago

I agree with this

$ 0.00
5 days ago