Bitcoin Cash (BCH), itself created via fork, has retained the true spirit of P2P cash bitcoin core (BTC) once had, and is set to fork in November due to certain differences in proposed changes to the network. Ultimately, a fork is an expression of dissent for a vibrant community, and that is something to celebrate.
Hard Forks Are Upgrades
Yes, that is correct. A hard fork indicates the BCH development community is in dissagreement about some things to advance the code path. This is one way the crypto world solves its differences. A hard fork was the path many took to open the way for the innovation that is constantly happening on the Bitcoin Cash side of things.
Innovation should not be thwarted in any way, it would be like stopping time. Software must keep evolving, and this is especially true when we talk about living and breathing software like cryptocurrency code.
This aspect is just one more that differentiates cryptocurrency from fiat currency. Fiat is static, and the circumstances around it are the ones that keep changing. But cryptocurrencies can evolve and change to become better and more convenient to use. So, a hard fork is an upgrade of sorts, fueled by differences.
Centralization? What Centralization?
This kind of event also serves the purpose of showing the cryptocurrency community Bitcoin Cash is not a centralized piece of software. Every dev has a voice and a vote in the future state of BCH, and that is a very powerful fact.
In the grand scheme of things, a fork could benefit the entire Bitcoin Cash ecosystem because there are various implementations of the protocol, and no one has preeminence over the others — in contrast with centralized counterparts that do follow a single monolithic development client.
That is why Bitcoin Cash code is certainly more reviewed and audited than others. There are more devs always looking at the code in different implementations so common bugs get ironed out quicker.
Controversy and Why the Fork is Happening
As it was said before, the fork comes from a fundamental difference between both sides: Bitcoin ABC is supporting the introduction of a new ordering tech, CTOR, that will supposedly improve performance, keeping blocks at a maximum size of 32 MB to preserve the the network as it is.
The side represented by nChain, with a new implementation called Bitcoin SV (Satoshi’s Vision), wants a return to the origin of bitcoin by restoring old unused opcodes. They are also proposing an increase of the block size from 32 MB to 128 MB, keeping the actual transaction order.
Both sides certainly have some merit to what they what to do, and reasons aplenty. One of the most important issues is block size, and it is a subject where both are correct. Bitcoin ABC stands by their decision to not increase due to how doing so might create problems in the network, cause node centralization by hardware requirement, and because the network is not filling the current block size limit.
Devs form Bitcoin SV also argue that for Bitcoin Cash to achieve the number of transactions to match current payment processors like Visa and PayPal, block size increase is absolutely necessary.
Don’t Worry, Be Happy!
Blockchains live and die by the hash power and support that they get from the miners, and this case won’t be an exception to that rule.
Bitcoin Cash is not going anywhere, and it will remain one of the most important cryptocurrencies in the crypto world, used as peer-to-peer cash, putting adoption and functionality front and center.
This, without a doubt, will strengthen the resolution of miners and devs to keep developing apps and protocols to improve and carry Bitcoin Cash to the place they want it to be. So, stop worrying and love the fork.
CONTINUE THE SPICE and check out our piping hot YouTube channel.