Live can be easy. You just need to cooperate instead of launching trolling campaigns against your users. A little tale about how Core fails to reduce the mempool or establish a new address format - while Bitcoin Cash suceeds.

Fuck those Evil Companies!

Fuck them all. Fuck Coinbase, BitPay, Bitmain, Roger Ver, Blockchain.info. Fuck the biggest Bitcoin payment provider, the biggest miner, the biggest investor. Fuck everybody who wants that Bitcoin lifts the blocksize limit. Liers, scammers, idiots, shills.
After several years of blocksize civil war in Bitcoin, after trolling campaigns, censorship and so on, Bitcoin Core and its militant followers got exactly what they wanted: SegWit, and nothing else. Every compromise with the industry was rejected and trolled as an attempt to take over or destroy Bitcoin. So the industry did what the small block militia wanted them to do: They forked off.
But this did not solve the problems. In fact, they have just begun.

Scaling Bitcoin with SegWit

A major problem Bitcoin is currently facing is the shortage of transactional capacity.
SegWit was advertised as the best and least disruptive solution to fix this problem. Core and its digital militia were so delighted by SegWit, that they even created a logo for it. SegWit was, we have been told over and over, accepted by community consensus and extensively peer reviewed and tested.
 

$5.40
$22.00

Reviews
41 of 41 reviewers say it's worth paying for

0 of 41 reviewers say it's not worth paying for
Comments
  earned 80.0¢
Excelent! Thanks for this great article.
$1.00
   8mo ago
50.0¢ 50.0¢
  earned 80.0¢
Too bad this read is not available for free to all. ;) Nice piece!
$1.00
   8mo ago
$1.00
  earned 80.0¢
It is without a doubt that BTC core cannot recover from its altruistic ego. There for, I predict BCH will consume it, thanks to projects like yours.org and the likes.
$1.00
   8mo ago
50.0¢ 50.0¢
  earned $1.80
In the first half of 2017, Adam started a post on the 'big block' Reddit form r/btc. The title asked for compromise. At the time support for Bitcoin Unlimited was 45% and SegWit at 30%, so it was promising that he would extend an olive branch. His idea of 'compromise' was "Take SegWit. You get nothing more." "Everyone is ready for SegWit" "We could have bigger blocks tomorrow if you accept SegWit".
We asked about bigger blocks in return. Instead "No, just SegWit".
He got what he wanted. No one was ready for it, even Core's very own wallet.
Keep it up, Adam. You are helping BCH. Although that was not your goal.
$2.00
   8mo ago
50.0¢ 50.0¢ 50.0¢ 50.0¢
  earned $1.40
Great article Christoph! You made me sign up with Yours. Blockstream/Core makes it very easy to make money these days if you read up a little. 1 BTC trades for over 6 BCH at the moment. It's a bargain! Blockstream/Core will not increase the max blocksize anytime soon. And even if they did, I don't think the miners would upgrade their software anymore. They would have done it one year ago, but now we have Bitcoin Cash for big blocks and the miners are fed up with Core's games. Lightning will not work as advertised. The tech might work, but the economics will not. Even with large, centralized hubs there will be huge financial hurdles. Imagine you are the big LN-hub and are going to open a channel to a merchant. He claimes that he will have a turnover of $10 000 USD per month. He wants to close the channel once a month. As an LN-hub, you now how to freeze up at least $10 000 USD worth of BTC. Your business model is to take some small fees from future transactions. So what happens if the merchant was too optimistic, get sick for a month or have other problems? You have now locked up $10 000 USD worth of BTC for a month, and nothing to show for. You might demand that the merchant locks up a certain amount, say 3% or $300 USD in BTC in the channel to cover the risk of this situation. But that's not a sweet deal for the merchant. Weekly or daily channels would decrease the credit risk, but increase the onchain transaction fees. Yearly channels would decrease onchain transaction fees, but increase the credit risk. The introduction of credit in L2 introduces new problems. And they are not user friendly. (Hmmm, maybe I should have written an article, not a comment, lol!)
$1.60
   8mo ago
50.0¢ 50.0¢ 50.0¢ 10.0¢
  earned 30.0¢
Hei Stein, I don't know how to answer directly on your comment (or if this is possible at all).
Happy that I was the reason to sign up on yours. I decided to give payment for content another chance, after I gave up some years ago. Maybe the vibe of Bitcoin Cash was the missing piece.
I agree with your analyses of LN: It might work technically, but not economically. There is not just one, but a dozen of reasons why, and it is no accident that there is nearly no company with economic success that bets on LN.
In the long, very long term I think somethink like LN will be good to have, maybe to process recurring payments or micropayments. But it is not a solution for the problems Bitcoin has right now.
Write an article about it!


50.0¢
   8mo ago
50.0¢