"Bitcoin is the first scarce digital object the world has ever seen, it is scarce like silver & gold, and can be sent over the internet, radio, satellite etc." - @100trillionUSD
If miners could dictate consensus, does that mean that the vast majority of miners today want BTC the way it is? Or maybe miners actually can't dictate consensus, they are slaves to the network of full nodes and UASF.
There is only one real Bitcoin, the rest are counterfeit the moment they copy the name and make their job into fudding BTC.
Bitcoin Cash along with VISA, Mastercard and Swift has solved the scaling problem by not being decentralised
BSV: Trust Craig S Wright the benevolent dictator BCH: Trust Amaury Séchet the benevolent dictator BTC: Don't trust - verify.
Nobody disputes that raising the block size lower fees. Those opposed to the idea argue that raising the block size makes an unacceptable tradeoff with the level of security and the degree of decentralization.
So when BCH has terabyte blocks and nobody can validate the chain anymore. Why use a blockchain and not a regular database, or why not switch to EOS like DPoS as PoW is meaningless in this "trust the miners" scenario.
The added size of the blockchain after 10 years with full blocks: BTC: 2 MB - 7 tx/s - 1.0 TB BCH: 32 MB - 112 tx/s - 16.8 TB BSV: 128 MB - 448 tx/s - 67.3 TB VISA LEVEL: 485 MB - 1700 tx/s - 255 TB
A 2x block size increase is nothing compared to the scale of millions of transactions per second through the Lightning protocol.
Segwit transactions, transaction batching, schnorr signatures, inter-exchange sidechain settling, layer2 offchain payments There are many smart ways to optimize block space other than merely raising the block size.
BCH: "A protest movement based on various conspiracy theories, often revolving around the misconception that Core developers control Bitcoin and have been corrupted by Blockstream and/or other outside influences."
Imagine Memo.Cash getting real adoption. And now multiply that 1000 times with of all other possible on-chain apps. The blockchain would need gigabyte blocks and I hope the promise of endless "fast and cheap tx" hold.
"Bitcoin isn't currently practical for very small micropayments. Not for things like pay per search or per page view without an aggregating mechanism" - Satoshi Nakamoto That aggregating mechanism is LN my friends.
Lightning Network is the true Peer-to-Peer electronic cash system as you connect to other nodes (P2P) to send payments. With Bitcoin on-chain you send your transaction to the P2P network but it's confirmed by miners.
The origin of the word “cash” is "caisse" (fr) meaning money-box. So cash is by definition store-of-value. Other Cypherpunks had used the word cash in their whitepapers, like "HashCASH", "eCASH", etc”.
The word "cash" in "A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" never meant cheap and fast transactions, the real meaning is "bearer asset".
A regular Memo post is ~270 bytes onchain. There are 200 billion tweets on Twitter every year. If Memo.Cash got all Twitter users it would require the blockchain to grow by 54 TB per year. Unscalable.
Big blockers be like: Trust us, trust the miners, trust Amaury. Trust trust trust. Bitcoiners be like: Don't trust - verify.
"While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model." - Satoshi Nakamoto referring to systems like Bitcoin Cash in the white paper.
BCH Core refused to follow Satoshi's roadmap and gigameg blocks. BCH Core is restricting block size limit to 32MB. Bitcoin SV is the legitimate Bitcoin and all others are altcoin forks.