The market is still speaking out: The debate over the design philosophies of BTC and BCH

Source: ElBitcoin Original Title: The Market Continues to Speak Original Link:

I once heard Majamalu talk about what happened on the Bitcoin forum: posts being deleted, users being systematically banned, insults flying everywhere. From his description, these spaces have essentially become branches of some sect. I was initially skeptical until I decided to voice my opinion in a Facebook group: I politely pointed out my reasons for believing that Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is superior to Bitcoin (BTC).

Majamalu warned me about what might happen, and I must admit he was right. I received a barrage of responses, almost all of them mocking and insulting. But not all. The only argument they gave me was this: “The market has spoken.” They implied that, due to the huge price difference between BTC and BCH, people have chosen the better option in the free market.

Indeed, in the world of cryptocurrencies, there is no coercion; everyone is free to choose. But I think it’s necessary to clarify some facts that blind followers of BTC deliberately ignore. The vast majority are still trying to understand what cryptocurrencies are, how they work, how they are issued, what advantages they have over alternatives, and so on. These technologies are recent, and like all revolutionary innovations, they have sparked skepticism and countless questions.

But those who dare to question and patiently study usually reap long-term rewards—just like the pioneers who delved into this topic from the very beginning. These pioneers were accused of being naive, crazy, even criminals, while “experts” predicted Bitcoin would soon perish.

Those who once mocked Bitcoin, criticizing its value as negligible or its price plummeting, now use the same arguments to mock us critics of BTC’s negative changes—arguments that were once weapons used by fiat currency and central bank supporters.

We once defended BTC, resisting attacks from all sides. We did so because we understood its advantages and believed this currency had the capacity to compete with fiat money, not as BTC supporters now propose—to serve it. For us, the existence of P2P electronic cash is crucial to restraining state power expansion. That has been our goal from the very beginning.

However, it is necessary to reiterate the question Majamalu raised in the podcast: if Satoshi Nakamoto’s proposal is exactly what today’s BTC supporters promote, would BTC succeed? That is, if it were a cryptocurrency with extremely high transaction fees, forcing people to use it only as a store of value or for transactions of millions of dollars; or if it were promoted as an alternative as slow as bank transactions; or if sending Bitcoin required relying on intermediaries at low cost; or if its promoters invited us to continue using fiat for most transactions… what would happen?

In today’s BTC world, many members seem to have joined the crypto ecosystem later; they invest in BTC without fully understanding what they are doing, lacking basic economic knowledge. Since rising BTC prices do not encourage these investors to think deeply, they adopt a defensive stance toward anything that might force them to reconsider their decisions—like BCH, which still maintains Satoshi’s original vision.

Saying that the market has “spoken” is absurd. The market has always been speaking; for the market, nothing is final. Those who believe there is no turning back and nothing will change either do not understand how economics works or are just defending their (poor) investments.

This can be illustrated by the competition between WhatsApp and other instant messaging apps. I remember years ago, when you could only send text messages via WhatsApp, other apps already offered voice messages and even video calls. But as the saying goes, “strike first.” As mentioned, the market has always been speaking; it could have punished WhatsApp for not progressing, which is why the company has been improving its service. Recently, concerns about WhatsApp privacy have been exploited by companies like Signal and Telegram, which have gained incredible popularity and user numbers in a very short time.

Consumers’ punishment may become even harsher in the future because the market has not stopped speaking and never will. WhatsApp decided to take action: first, improve its service, then provide explanations to clarify privacy issues. BTC developers, on the other hand, did the opposite: they proudly continue down the same path, assuring us that this is just the beginning; transaction fees will keep rising, and we should celebrate it.

Meanwhile, the market continues to speak, despite attempts to silence it.