April 23, 2026

Capitalizations Index – B ∞/21M

How Bitcoin Cash Can Avoid the Same Mistakes as Bitcoin Core, Part 3

bitcoin News
How bitcoin Cash Can Avoid the Same Mistakes as bitcoin Core, Part 3
How bitcoin cash can avoid the same mistakes as bitcoin core, part 3

The following opinion piece was written by Jonald Fyookball.

In parts 1 and 2 of How bitcoin Cash …, we uncovered the important principles of community education and clarity. Now it is time to turn our attention to one of the most obvious things that went wrong in BTC — the centralization of protocol development.

Also read:  How Bitcoin Cash Can Avoid the Same Mistakes as Bitcoin Core, Part 2

How bitcoin Cash Can Avoid Centralization

Decentralization comes in many forms: decentralization of nodes, mining pools, wealth, and so on. One thing that was overlooked for a long time in bitcoin BTC was that while many things were well distributed, there was only one main group of developers (bitcoin Core).

Decentralized Development
Most of the BCH community is now well aware of this folly, and that is why we seek to have multiple independent teams of developers along with multiple full node implementations.

Miners need established, robust software they can rely on, and its important to have several choices; otherwise it means that a single group of developers essentially controls the protocol.

How bitcoin cash can avoid the same mistakes as bitcoin core, part 3

Entrenchment of “The Reference Implementation”
bitcoin Core became entrenched as “the” bitcoin software, which led to stagnation. Although there were already several different implementations, the dominance of bitcoin Core has been overwhelming.

Technically, it’s hash power that matters, not how many different nodes are running a certain software… But given the totally lopsided distribution, it was clear that anyone running a different version from Core would be a tiny minority. That means bitcoin Core calls all the shots as far as BTC protocol rules.

BCH is Doing Better Already
We’re heading in the right direction but we’re not out of the woods yet. One interesting phenomenon is that the current level of BCH development decentralization is often either underestimated or overestimated.

On one extreme, some believe development is fully decentralized (since there’s, what, 6 node implementations now?). By contrast, others see the leading team (bitcoin ABC) as having become the next reference implementation.

The truth is somewhere in the middle. bitcoin ABC runs around 60–70% of the BCH nodes and bitcoin Unlimited runs about a third of them. Essentially, instead of one main implementation, there’s now two.

Maybe that sounds a bit disappointing, but that’s twice as many as BTC.

How bitcoin cash can avoid the same mistakes as bitcoin core, part 3

Meritocracy

A meritocracy is defined as “the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability.”

There’s often a misguided notion that the main development groups in BCH should have magically have equal influence, rather than acknowledging that influence must be earned.

Those fearful of ABC having too much power might not understand this principle, or more likely, they haven’t seen all that ABC has accomplished to earn what is currently a majority “market share”.

The fact of the matter is that bitcoin ABC has been the best in class when it comes to leading protocol development, producing timely releases of solid code, and solving problems.

To be specific, it was bitcoin ABC that created the first node software for bitcoin Cash, and spearheaded both hard fork upgrades along with the Cashaddr addresses.

How bitcoin cash can avoid the same mistakes as bitcoin core, part 3

Healthy Competition is the Way Forward
This is not to say that bitcoin Cash wouldn’t benefit from an even more disbursed landscape, with several of the smaller implementations gaining more market share and influence.

Instead of the misplaced idea that ABC should be reigned in, other teams should catch up to ABC by competing. That means they need to do as good a job as ABC has done at leading protocol development and delivering reliable software that serves the community.

While its good to have a healthy fear of avoiding another “Core”, bitcoin ABC actually has been extremely inclusive toward other teams. ABC organizes meetings with other BCH devs (both online and in real life), has created open work groups for various bitcoin related topics, has invited developers from other groups into their private discussion channels, and has even written code for other teams.

It feels that we’re on the right track with decentralizing protocol development, and I expect it will continue to improve over time.

In the upcoming conclusion (Part 4), we’ll take a look at mining, development funding, and some big picture solutions.

Written by Jonald Fyookball
Jonald Fyookball (pseudonym) is a cryptocurrency enthusiast, best known as the project leader of the Electron Cash wallet, and for a series of hard hitting articles on the bitcoin scaling debate. Jonald is a computer scientist, businessman, investor, libertarian, and bitcoin advocate.

What are your thoughts on educating the BCH community? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Images courtesy of Shutterstock.

Do you agree with us that bitcoin is the best invention since sliced bread? Thought so. That’s why we are building this online universe revolving around anything and everything bitcoin. We have a store. And a forum. And a casino, a pool and real-time price statistics.

This is an Op-ed article. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. bitcoin.com does not endorse nor support views, opinions or conclusions drawn in this post. bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy or quality within the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the content. bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information in this Op-ed article.

The post How Bitcoin Cash Can Avoid the Same Mistakes as Bitcoin Core, Part 3 appeared first on Bitcoin News.

Crypto Coin Updates
TokenMarket Reveals a Series of New York Roadshow Appearances

How bitcoin cash can avoid the same mistakes as bitcoin core, part 3

Tokenmarket nyc appearances

May 11, 2018 – The leading ICO advisory firm TokenMarket is excited to reveal that it will be attending a number of high profile blockchain and crypto conferences hosted in New York during Blockchain Week NYC 2018.

TokenMarket will be represented by a number of its team members at these industry leading events, including CEO Ransu Salovaara and CTO Mikko Ohtamaa.

 

Crypto Economy Event: New York | May 13, 2018


TokenMarket will begin its series of event appearances at the Crypto Economy Event in New York on May 13th, 2018. This event will kick off its third leg of the tour with Michael Terpin delivering a keynote presentation on ‘Investing in the Crypto Economy’.

In partnership with Crypto Economy, TokenMarket are hosting networking and drinks reception on May 13th in New York after the programs informative schedule. Crypto Economy’s organisers, BECON have successfully organised numerous networking receptions producing a high turnout of guests, investors and industry through leaders.

Following on from BECON’s Crypto Economy event, TokenMarket will be heading to Coindesk’s Consensus 2018 from May 14th-16th.

 

Consensus | May 14-16, 2018


After the initial success of the first Coindesk Consensus in 2015, the event has grown on an unprecedented scale, doubling the amount of speakers, attendees and sessions that take place each year. Consensus 2018 will feature over 250 speakers, 137 sessions and more than 4,000 attendees to discuss a number of areas within the blockchain industry. Leaders from a number of industries including investors, financial institutions and enterprise tech leaders will be attending to discuss the business of blockchain.

TokenMarket is excited to be attending Consensus after hearing exceptional feedback from its previous events and the team attending, are looking forward to meeting everyone at the conference.

The final leg of the TokenMarket appearances in New York will conclude at the Token Summit III from May 16th-17th.

 

Token Summit III | May 16-17, 2018


The basis of the Token Summit III conference is simple: “to discuss the economics, regulation and best practices around blockchain-based tokens, protocols, and crypto-assets” as producers and hosts William Mougayar and Nick Tomaino state. With over 40 confirmed speakers across two days, TokenMarket is excited to explore the token based economy industry with some of the leading speakers in the industry.

Please contact marketing@tokenmarket.net if you would like to connect with the team whilst in New York.

 

About TokenMarket


TokenMarket is a premier ICO information portal and advisory firm. It combines its market experience, resources and data assets to create a professionally tailored solution to execute ICO’s safely and securely, providing an end-to-end service for token creation, presale and public sale. TokenMarket’s ICO advisory service has partnered over 30 token sales including Storj, Populous, Monaco, Civic and Dent, raising over $300 million in total.

Previous Article

‘Join The Tron (TRX) Revolution,’ requests Justin Sun

Next Article

Kodak Blockchain Project Targets US$50 Million Raise in Token Offering

You might be interested in …

Viabtc explains why they don’t support segwit

ViaBTC Explains Why They Don’t Support SegWit

ViaBTC’s latest blog post sheds some light on why the mining pool is opposing the bitcoin scaling proposal, SegWit.


ViaBTC, bitcoin Core and SegWit

ViaBTC just published a blog post in which they explain the reason behind their opposition to SegWit, citing the concerns regarding the complexity of the soft fork, the irreversible damage it may and the introduction of second-tier networks like Lightning Network. The mining pool also mentions Bitcoin Core’s impact on bitcoin and the community as a negative, claiming that they are “abusing their previous influence”. The post reads:

Today, bitcoin is in urgent need of diversified dev teams and implementations to achieve decentralization in bitcoin development.

As companies and mining pools choose their side of the debate, SegWit or Bitcoin Unlimited, most have released statements regarding which solution they are backing and why. While most companies favor the activation of SegWit, mining power has been on the side of BU. Among the pools that support BU, Antpool and ViaBTC have been two of the most vocal regarding bitcoin Core and the Segregated Witness proposal. On ViaBTC’s transaction accelerator page, a popup service statement reads:

ViaBTC is of the opinion that the current “bitcoin Core + Blockstream” bitcoin development team is not taking satisfactory steps to ensure the growth and advancement of bitcoin in accordance with satoshi’s original white paper, and is in fact actively harming the health of the bitcoin economy by actively stifling efforts to solve some of bitcoin’s most pressing problems.

“SegWit doesn’t solve the most urgent capacity issue”

In the latest blog post dubbed “Why we don’t support SegWit”, ViaBTC states that SegWit is a soft fork solution for transaction malleability and that it cannot solve the current network overcapacity problem which is currently the most urgent issue in the bitcoin network.ViaBTC goes on to state that second-tier networks like Lightning Network cannot be considered as a block scaling solution. The blog post reads:

LN transactions are NOT equal to bitcoin’s peer-to-peer on-chain transactions and most bitcoin use scenarios are not applicable with Lightning Network. LN will also lead to big payment “centers”, and this is against bitcoin’s initial design as a peer-to-peer payment system.

However, the SegWit is not Lightning Network (LN). SegWit introduces a much-needed fix for a pressing issue in bitcoin, which is transaction malleability. This fix would allow LN to be implemented in bitcoin.

Bitcoin network overcapacity

However, ViaBTC seems to be missing some very important points. The introduction of a patch to one of bitcoin’s bugs should not be considered as harmful just because it allows developers to build a second network on top of bitcoin. bitcoin should be cleared of bugs like transaction malleability and developers should be free to build whatever they want (which is what has happened so far) on top of bitcoin.

The fact that a mining pool would block an important fix like this due to the possibility of losing out on transaction fees is, at best, selfish. ViaBTC also seems to have missed the fact that some forms of second-tier networks are already possible in bitcoin, even without the transaction malleability fix, and are being developed right now. Lastly, one should also note that without these channels, users that are looking for the advantages they would provide will find them elsewhere either through altcoins or centralized payment systems, which can only result in the loss of use cases for bitcoin with nothing gained.

ViaBTC’s statement that “SegWit doesn’t solve the most urgent capacity issue” is, however, correct. While it may be considered as a “quick-fix” that will double the network’s capacity, further updates will have to be made in the future. This is where bitcoin Unlimited seems to please its supporters, their Emergent Consensus protocol proposes a fix that is somewhat “permanent” as it allows the block size limit to change according to demand.

“SegWit makes it harder for future block scaling”

Here, ViaBTC cites some real concerns regarding the possibility for future scaling updates which are indeed made harder by SegWit’s changes. SegWit allows blocks to reach a 4MB limit due to the way witness data is accounted for. However, this limit is not meant to be reached, as the only data that is read differently is the witness data and not the tx. inputs and outputs. This results in a ~2MB block limit under regular circumstances.

This means that a possible attack vector is to create 4MB block which is a problem for the network. So, any future increases, for example from a ~2MB limit to a ~4MB limit, will theoretically allow a block that is four times bigger to be created, in the example above this would mean a ~16MB limit. This, however, is extremely unlikely and is not seen as a problem for bitcoin Core developers.

The problem is that if a way to implement this attack did come along, SegWit could not be reversed. The blog post reads:

On technical terms, SegWit uses a transaction format that can be spent by those who don’t upgrade their nodes, with segregation of transaction data and signature data. This means SegWit is irrevocable once it’s activated, or all unspent transactions in SegWit formats will face the risk of being stolen.

While this may be a real concern to a certain degree, the prospect of an attack vector that is currently considered impossible and would theoretically become a problem once the network implements a second scaling update, which may never happen, doesn’t seem to be a valid reason for blocking SegWit.

“SegWit will deepen Core’s impact on the community”

In the last section of the blog post, ViaBTC states its concerns regarding the bitcoin Core development team and its influence on the bitcoin community, citing problems like the infamous censorship perpetrated by bitcoin Core on Reddit and bitcoin forums. This seems to be completely off from what bitcoin is supposed to be, a global apolitical currency.

bitcoin forums, boards and development teams are not part of bitcoin. They are exterior to the network. If there is indeed censorship going on in these places, users should abandon them. If the bitcoin Core team is trying to turn bitcoin into a centralized payment system (or whatever), the community/miners should not approve their updates. However, rejecting an update based on the developer that proposed it, and not on the actual code, is childish. This reason could easily be turned around on the bitcoin Unlimited development team, which has had its fair share of controversy.

Conclusion

While we do believe that both scaling proposals have their strengths and weaknesses, ViaBTC’s concerns regarding SegWit seem to be non-existent at best: Blocking transaction malleability is a malicious act on the network. Opposition to SegWit should be based on the problems it will cause the network and not on the problems it could theoretically cause if a currently-nonexistent attack vector is eventually found. Lastly, users should decide what is best for the network and not whom, that’s the beauty of bitcoin.

Do you think that ViaBTC is right and that we are missing the point? If so, let us know in the comment section.


Images Courtesy of

The post ViaBTC Explains Why They Don’t Support SegWit appeared first on Bitcoinist.com.

Hardfork ethereum en español /// criptomonedas e ico

HardFork Ethereum en Español /// Criptomonedas e ICO

HardFork Ethereum en Español /// Criptomonedas e ICO 🔹 TELEGRAM: https://t.me/CriptomonedasIco 🔹 FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/Criptomoneda… 🔹 TWITTER: http://twitter.com/criptomonedaico 🔹 INSTAGRAM: https://instagram.com/criptomonedaseico/ Whitepaper: https://ethereumcv.io/ whitepaper.pdf Sitio web: https://ethereumcv.io/#subscribe BitcoinTalk: jalcacer ————– 🔹 Link registro Binance : http://bit.ly/2MOWpGb […]

Brave’s user ad rewards have finally gone live

Brave’s User Ad Rewards Have Finally Gone Live

Brave’s User Ad Rewards Have Finally Gone Live Brave has reached a new milestone. The browser company has long promised its users that they will be able to earn crypto while surfing the web. Now, […]