r/btc • u/Peytonmoon69 • 1d ago
Just now learning about the blocksize war after reading hijacking bitcoin. There are other flavors of Bitcoin. Which one do you think survives 300 years from now?
14
u/DangerHighVoltage111 23h ago
Likely none, but if you ask which one gives us the best shot for sound p2p cash in our lifetime, then it is BitcoinCash, and far ahead of the rest even.
0
u/TheHoleInADonut 13h ago
Ya’ll heard of Kaspa? What do ya’ll think of it?
New-ish PoW blockchain that builds off the idea of Nakamoto consensus, but focuses on block settlement time while implementing new tech.
It apparently can validate multiple blocks simultaneously, as opposed to linearly like almost every other blockchain. I just heard of it like a week ago and so far, from what i’ve read about it, i think in 10-20 years it’ll probably serve as the best P2P currency. Even over BCH.
I know I sound like i’m promoting it, but i am genuinely curious of others opinions here. Looking into it, it feels like i’m catching bitcoin in like 2011.
4
5
u/CashDragonX Redditor for less than 60 days 23h ago
The real one.
There is also an action film version of Hijacking Bitcoin, very entertaining.
Hijacking Bitcoin: by Roger Ver
3
u/ScoobaMonsta 23h ago
Monero! Its what people thought bitcoin was back in the old days. Monero is the true satoshi vision. Anyone who knows what satoshi was talking before he went silent, knows he wanted privacy on bitcoin. He just didn't know how to do it technically at that time. If he was still active today, he'd be right behind Monero and their ethos.
2
2
1
1
0
u/therealruderpaule 22h ago
But that's what people from Bitcoin cash and kaspa also claim.. Not necessarily the privacy thing but that they represent the true vision.
1
u/ScoobaMonsta 22h ago
But one of the fundamentals of money is fungibility. Monero provides its users with fungible money.
1
u/therealruderpaule 22h ago
Maybe a stupid question but why don't they provide fungible money? I think that's the only thing most crypto have in common
0
u/ScoobaMonsta 22h ago
Any blockchain with a public ledger by definition is not fungible.
1
u/Dune7 22h ago
Monero's ledger is public - everyone can download it.
It's just encrypted.
There's nothing stopping smart contracts running on BCH from providing similar or better level of privacy through encryption.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/1id2ez5/userdeployed_bitcoin_cash_covenants_can_implement/
1
u/ScoobaMonsta 19h ago
You clearly don't understand the difference between a public ledger and a private ledger. Bch does not provide better privacy than Monero.
1
1
u/MMetalRain 23h ago
None of them, people don't care what the currency is, as long as it's stable and works.
1
-4
u/SkepticalEmpiricist 21h ago edited 21h ago
BTC
It's the only one designed to solve the two main problems around merchant adoption:
Merchants don't want to collect a random shitcoin which needs to be converted to fiat, they want to collect a store of value. BTC is the store of value
The Lightning network is the only attempt by Bitcoin-related chains to allow a very high rate of instant, trustless, transactions
12
u/Dune7 21h ago
When your L2 depends on high liquidity 'hubs' which function like banks, your 'trustless' goes out the window and you end up using custodial wallets like 95% of LN users.
And eventually your custodians get to say whether you can transact or not.
Characterizing LN as a scaling solution for Bitcoin was a scam.
-3
u/SkepticalEmpiricist 18h ago
So boring that you make the same arguments without evidence
Even if it's true that 95% of wallets are custodial, the other 5% still do more transactions each day than BCH does
5
u/NonTokeableFungin 18h ago
Interesting.
So your thought is : “ merchants will want to collect & save in a SoV “. Correct ?And you reckon they will choose BTC.
May we ask - how many merchants could do this ?
Reasonably … how many entities / people can realistically touch the chain ?Network Capacity is 600k Transactions per day, yeah ?
(If we’re being generous. Ref. Blockchain dot com )We have seen what happens when it gets to that level of throughput - see 02-07 May 2023 (Ordinals rush) But let’s be generous, and just assume it can handle that much traffic.
How many merchants could use bitcoin chain ?
3
u/DangerHighVoltage111 18h ago
Network Capacity is 600k Transactions per day, yeah ?
More like 300k if you want payment transactions. Ordinals skewed the graphs.
3
u/NonTokeableFungin 18h ago
Right. Likely so.
But the oft-quoted 7 TPS does jibe with ~600 k per day. And I agree - the chain ground to a virtual halt when it did hit 600 k (Tx’s stuck for 4 or 5 days)But just to give complete benefit of the doubt to bitcoin, let’s be extremely generous, and go with a figure of 600k per day.
3
u/DangerHighVoltage111 18h ago
Yeah, 7tps is very generous. More like 3.5-4 tps.
Take a look at this chart:
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactions.html#alltime
One can easily spot the 300k between 2017 and 2023 when ordinals emerged.
-4
u/SkepticalEmpiricist 17h ago
This is a waste of our time
Everyone knows that BTC+Lightning is much more scalable than BCH, as the BCH-tards refuse to use Lightning. End of discussion
4
u/NonTokeableFungin 17h ago
I don’t really know anything about BCH.
Anyways, you brought up Merchant adoption. Working assumption is that if merchants want to operate on digital asset rails, they will use Stablecoins. Of some sort.
But evidently, you suggest they’ll use bitcoin. Yeah ?
So, question remains : how many entities could realistically use the chain ?
And you did suggest : “trustless”. So we take it you mean self-sovereign.
So, if they would use bitcoin, then they’ll need to run a Node ?
Or at very least if they engage with LN, they need to run a Lightning Node. Yeah ?3
u/don2468 11h ago
u/SkepticalEmpiricist scurried away the last time his BCH 'arguments' were demonstrated to be baseless. lol
As for BTC + Lightning, don't take a bcashers word for it,
Here's the Co-Inventor of the Lightning Network
Tadge Dryja: “In the future, if you have this one-megabyte restricted blocksize and the Lightning Network, it is still the rich people and companies that can use lightning but the average user probably can’t.” link
or Blockstreams Lightning guy Christian Decker explaining the LN scalability limits to Niftynei
Niftynei: Will there be enough liquidity or blockspace to go around?
Christian Decker: Only enough for a few millions, perhaps 10's of millions. link
Now keep in mind that there are already 66 Million $Millionaires in the world to fight over those10's of millions slots
It's looking like a custodial future for BTC + Lightning <=> a CBDC in all but name.
But at least the masses will get an IOU for NgU.
3
u/Dune7 16h ago
as the BCH-tards refuse to use Lightning
This is false.
What is correct is that LN doesn't work well on a small-block L1 like BTC. It's whitepaper even states it'll need 133MB blocks for global adoption.
And we have almost-free, virtually instant transactions on BCH already, plus scalability through an adaptive block size algorithm. There may be a use case for LN somewhere, but so far Bitcoin Cash users don't need it. That doesn't mean we oppose anyone building an L2 payment channel network like LN on top of BCH. It's permissionless, sooner or later someone might try it.
2
0
u/Aragorn_is_Kaladesh 10h ago
This subreddit has been hijacked by bait-and-switch BCH scammers. If you give them a chance to shill for BCH, they will do that.
2
u/LovelyDayHere 9h ago
Whenever BCH supporters bring the facts, BTC maxis and no-coiners have no recourse but to call them "scammers" and attempt to censor them.
Long term, this isn't going to help BTC at all.
2
u/phillipsjk 6h ago
Re-read the into to the Whitepaper and tell me again which fork is run by "bait-and-switch scammers".
Bitcoin was supposed to be faster, cheaper, and more secure than traditional payment networks. The restricted blocksize means the BTC is no longer any of those things.
Within months of the fork: the BTC network stopped properly processing transactions for weeks. Steam stopped accepting Bitcoin because half the transactions appeared to be fraudulent. I suspect what was happening was that people were getting refunds on stuck transactions, and then said transactions got double-spent while sitting waiting for confirmation.
This has real world consequences: Steam recently delisted a bunch of games dealing with disturbing themes due to threats from their credit card processor. They don't see cryptocurrency as an option anymore.
13
u/Leather-Dimension-73 23h ago
USD isn’t even 300 years old