Short answer, stick with Bitcoin (BTC) - Turn Right.
Let me first start by saying that a few weeks ago I exchanged my Bitcoins (BTC) for Bitcoin Cash (BCH/BCC). I did a bit more research on what actually caused the price hike from $300 USD to over $900 USD, and a more deeper look into the technical side of things. I've since exchanged them back to BTC. So let me start off by outlining the key differences between BTC and BCC.
Two factions are at play, each with their preferred strategy to handling the scaling issue. On one side is Bitcoin Core, a development team once headed by Satoshi, Gaven, Jeff and Mike Hearn - but now handled by what some call the 'second generation' of enthusiasts. Bitcoin Core proposed the application of the SegWit protocol that would segregate and reduce information on the defualt 1mb blocks. Segwit also enable the use of the Lightning network, which has been demonstrated succesfully on the 'Litecoin' network. The lightning network creates 'offchain' channels that can route through multiple people to ease the loading on the Block network. More on this in the video linked below.
The other camp, wishes to increase the blocksize itself as a means to lower fees and increase traffic load, however such updates are incompatible with Bitcoins blockchain, leading to a hardfork. The proposed increase was originally 2mb, latter increased to 8mb. Increasing the block size does remedy a short-term problem, but threatens the ability for small size miners to remain competitive if this strategy is only further replicated. The following podcast goes in to more background information on the debate, and the significant players involved.
https://soundcloud.com/thecryptocast/ep8-btc-vs-bcc
So Bitcoin Cash is not supporting SegWit, it boasts an 8mb block size (but is that really a good thing?). This allows the blockchain to handle more traffic, however you would need about 250mb block sizes to really scale up to a global level (7 billion people doing avg 20 transactions /day) - so another hardfork would be needed, and another, and another. Only super-scale mining giants could service that size of blocks - aka, centralised.
Bitcoin Cash does however, have an 'Emergency Difficulty Adjustment' protocol that essentially incentives miners to mine the Bitcoin cash chain even when the volume of transactions drop - more reward for less, less reward for more. It's as if someone didn't want the coin to crash, but if it exploded it would be generally restricted to large corporate business operations taking over the mining.
So this was one strategy to the scaling issue, and it's important to note that it was not well supported in comparison to the SegWit softfork. https://coin.dance/nodes/share
Refer to 'BitcoinABC' as the node supporter for 'Bitcoin Cash'. Segwit activation went ahead because the target of 95% of miners was reached that signalled for SegWit activation. Now that it is activated, it enables bitcoin compatibility for the use of the 'Lightning Network'.
Essentially the lightning network with segwit, will allow bitcoin to scale globally, and conduct micro payments instantly with smaller fees again. As it still uses the small block size, it maintains the integrity of a decentralised network that does not beckon the need for giant mining pools. To understand Segwit better, please watch the following video;
So your choice is clear - support the tech-savvy developers that have devoted most of the last decade to bring you the coin that started it all, or get roped in to the rich guy dangling a 8mb block and saying thats the solution. It is your money, your investment - but Bitcoin Cash, and like its previous attempts to derail Bitcoin (Bitcoin Ultimate, Bitcoin Plus) are nothing but FUD!!! After all, 90% of Bitcoin Cash is being mined by one node, and most of it's market capital came from 3 exchanges in south korea - Korbit being one of them - just one of the many investments of Roger Ver, along with Ripple.
I have done several transactions today with the new segwit supported trezor wallet - It has been a massive difference, arrived almost instantly and confirmed in 1-2 mins. I guess this is what will ultimately matter - the service. Don't be fooled into marketing strategies, yeh the 8mb blocksize sounds good, but it is grossly insignificant. Once again, your money, your choice... I know what mine is.
If you would like to donate, details are as follows
Bitcoin: 388eHVMUdDn9EqCnytFdQabwZsW8ybVmdo
Litecoin: MSarwkbtjEScboVDppYhzcgohCUHYDVeNg
Bitcoin Cash: 1MUCiWHfcSzxZ1cxBr88kStPQrEpE4aRks
Ethereum: 0xF4dD42BC37516f729133658726E3034cC4c9B0A8
Dash: XsnuT8rXCz98utSbGBiMqySkR7FsbjX9gw
Thank you for your time reading, please share if you wish.
I stopped up reading after the first few paragraphs.
There is too much argumentum ad verecundiam and argumentum ad hominem in the bitcoin scaling debate. Please try to be a bit more objective.
There are probably lots and lots of issues with this article, just from the quoted paragraph, I have those comments:
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I have updated the article based on your feedback. Please remove the flag if you are satisfied with the corrections.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think the article is still quite one-sided, but I think my reasons to flag it have been fully addressed.
Personally I believe it's a high probability that Bitcoin Cash will fall a lot in value over the next few months (but still have a higher market cap than Litecoin), and a very small probability that Bitcoin will crash and Bitcoin Cash becoming the new Bitcoin. Technically I think Bitcoin Cash is more sound than Bitcoin with Segwit and 1 MB blocks.
The best would be if everyone could just gather around the current compromise: SegWit2X.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you, I'd be happy to take on more feedback for adjustments if you have any. On a side note, do you think the 2mb block increase with segwit will be enough of a change to effectively get people to shift chains?
I'm assuming a lot of people will be thinking that the November hard fork will be much like the August one - where everyone who has Bitcoins and their own keys will receive more free coins. But what is the Hardfork splitting from? - Bitcoin Legacy (without segwit) or the Bitcoin with Segwit?
It's no validation, but bitcoin has hit new highs this morning, as bitcoin cash dropped about 7%.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
SegWit is not a 2 MB block size increase. With SegWit, the blocks can actually theoretically go as high as 4 MB, but only if it's filled up with very signature-heavy transactions. People that have analyzed SegWit claims the extra capacity will be somewhere between 1.2x and 1.7x when all transactions are segwit transactions. So far a mere 0.65% of the transactions are segwit transactions. No, the block size increase with SegWit is not at all enough, it's too late, too slow and too little. SegWit2X at the other hand, will give enough capacity to last well into 2018, perhaps all the way to 2019.
Lightning technology is cool, but I believe we'll be in 2019 before it has the necessary outreach - and by then, there is a high risk that virtually all payments are going through some very few big hubs. Lightning is no silver bullet, it's important to keep in mind that it takes two on-chain transactions to open a payment channel, and the channel should be closed as well. Lightning will work very well with microtransactions, I believe it will open up a lot of new use-cases (as well as re-open a lot of use-cases that was possible when the bitcoin fees were lower). We'll see a lot of transactions on the lightning network, but this is mostly new traffic, it's not going to replace the ordinary bitcoin traffic.
I have been wrong before ... but a well-functioning Bitcoin with SegWit and 1 MB base block size, I don't see it happening.
I was selling my Bitcoin Cash very early. I believe the current price is artificially high.
This has nothing to do with the technical details. Whatever Bitcoin can do, there exist alts that can do the same thing better - bitcoin wouldn't be the king of the hill if it was only the technical details that mattered. Bitcoin has three things going for it, it's the network effect, the brand name and (arguably) the strong security offered by miners. Bitcoin Cash has none of those. Still, it is a worthy contender to Litecoin.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In November there is supposed to be a doubling of the base block size (SegWit2X aka New York Agreement aka Silbert accords) - but the developers of Bitcoin Core does not want that to happen. I have tried to make some predictions on what is going to happen in my Bitcoin Forks -
for Dummies article. Note that the "clean split"-scenario is the only "free money"-kind of split.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I also believe 250 Mb block sizes would be very bad. Seriously, we need second-layer scaling options. People have become so fanatic in this debate that they aren't able to see the two sides of the debate anymore - there are for sure quite some people on the "bigblock" camp that seriously thinks online scaling is the only right thing and that gigabyte-sized blocks aren't problematic. We do need second-layer scaling, and we do need bigger blocks. Now, SegWit is not the only way to achieve second-layer scaling. The alternative proposal is FlexTrans. From my perspective, it seems to be a much cleaner approach than SegWit; while SegWit is a overly complex workaround, FlexTrans seems to be a clean and simple fix.
I see no valid arguments against an 8 Mb block size. I could have bought hardware for running several full bitcoin nodes for the total amount of bitcoin fees I've paid due to the current capacity strain, the "8MB blocks are bad because we cannot afford the hardware for running nodes" is bollocks.
Before yelling "centralization!" or "decentralization!", try to define the terms. Yes, bigger blocks do pose a centralization risk, but so does high fees! Forcing everyone to use lightning is also very much a centralization risk, it is an extremely likely outcome that almost everyone will be pushed into connecting to a big payment hub, and it's likely that there will only be a handful - maybe even only one or two such big payment hubs.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You're using the wikipedia article as a source for the argument that Roger got rich basically from illegal firework sale, and you attribute his early bitcoin investments to said activity. Now, the Wikipedia article states that he already got rich around 2004 from hist computer parts business, and that his conviction for selling firearms was in 2003.
I'm quite concerned that Roger Ver's heavy-handed involvement in the Bitcoin Scaling debate is partly to blame for the current schism in the Bitcoin environment. It seems quite probable that he has been playing quite some dirty tricks. Still, you got your facts wrong, and even if it was right it ought to be completely irrelevant.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That information I got from the podcast I linked, which I found on reddit. Thanks for you're feedback, I'll work in the adjustments. Do understand it's like Chinese whispers on this topic, I did feel time pressed as peoples money is on the line. Granted not completely accurate it seems, but the end choice I think is still spot on.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This is the first time ever I've used the flag-option. Sorry for that. I'm sure you've spent lots of time and efforts writing the post, but still - from the title and initial paragraph this seems to be a comparison of two coins and possibly an investment advice. Then, reading the article all I see is subjective rantings - even full of wrong facts, ad-hominems and a touch of ad-verecundiam. No, this is no good.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations @michael.collett! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about this award, click here
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations @michael.collett! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPDownvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Nice article. Very Informative.
Keep Steeming.Keep Upvoting !!!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I proudly stand beside the original Bitcoin, and i see Bitcoin Cash as a sort of dividend ;)
As im not sure about how future blockchain developments will go, i'm just holding on to both at the moment. Who knows, i may regret selling it in the future, so just having both calms my mind a little, lol.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit