hi, @ardocrat.I’m concerned about what you said on platform X.you said that “real bitcoin is not BTC”,what is real Btcoin?why?
2 Likes
see Bitcoin Cash BCH. for many people (and I have at least one foot in this camp) BCH is the real bitcoin
p.s. I’m concerned about your screenshot! you took a photo of a broken screen? i think there’s a better way 
Do you still consider BCH the real bitcoin once they add a tail emission to maintain security in the face of dwindling block rewards?
1 Like
Interesting q esp since I’ve often speculated whether BTC itself might find some of its supporters in favour of this measure at some point in the future if txn fees are not enough to incentivise enough mining power to secure the network, and that since Lightning Network is off-chain it may not provide enough onchain settlement txns when closing channels etc
The strength of my conviction that BCH is the real Bitcoin is not perhaps so strong as it once was; but the justification for it comes from the more centralised power structure in BTC as well as its core developers holding so steadfastly to small block sizes. I get why bitcoin cannot scale that way, but it still feels stingy. While “anybody can contribute to Bitcoin code” may technically be true, I think it likely that in practice a cabal of maintainers with a shared vision are pretty hostile to most suggestions.
But I’m being rather long-winded and will answer your question directly:
I believe the correct response, and that which a cryptocurrency purist or cypherpunk would agree with, is that if the miners vote for it by updating to the code which enables it (which they would have to) then yes - a person who considers BCH the real Bitcoin should go on believing that BCH is the real Bitcoin. Same goes for BTC maximalists should such a fate befall them.
Ironically, this firm belief that the real bitcoin is that which the miners vote for with hash power goes a long way to void any conviction that BCH is the real Bitcoin. But things used to be closer. In practice BTC is of course the real Bitcoin, even if philosophically BCH feels like the real Bitcoin
I think whether miners vote for it is not all that relevant. What matters is whether people believe Bitcoin should remain true to its essence. That’s not a belief that should be outsourced to a group of entities that stands to profit from certain changes.
Bitcoin was built on the premise of a 21M hardcap, and I think breaking that supposedly most immutable of properties renders the coin unviable. It’s an admission of the design being fundamentally broken.
3 Likes
For me term Bitcoin is like Satoshi, no one made true anon crypto after Grin.
2 Likes
I think the focus on “the real Bitcoin” is kind of silly, and borders on a cult-like mentality.
The more important question is what problem was Bitcoin originally trying to solve? What was its intended purpose at design time?
And the answer is obvious, it was in the title of the paper! Neither BTC nor BCH are electronic cash due to combinations of fungibility and scalability issues. The former is unlikely to become it due to deeply entrenched political interests, and the latter as it burned so much good will at its start that it’s irreparably tainted.
2 Likes
Peer-to-peer electronic cash, separate state from money.
Banks were so scared they can be replaced so they decided not to stop it, but use it to save system from collapse.
2 Likes
Separating state and money was indeed the goal. That banks, corporations, and states are now capturing the BTC supply is an indicator of its failure.
So, which cryptocurrency are they most scared of today? That’s the one I’ll be using for now.
One day they’ll be scared of Grin too. 
3 Likes
As of today 94.56% of bitcoins have been mined and it’ll take another 115 years to mine out the rest by 2140. In many ways this already is a tail emission and many of us would be surprised if Bitcoin actually makes it to 2140!
Bending the 21M would likely damage Bitcoin irrevocably I agree, but I’m curious whether you think the design is fundamentally broken (I suspect you do) leaving bitcoin maxis in a Catch 22?
Add a tail emission and lose the value proposition of “digital scarcity” or preserve the scarcity at the cost of security. Death in either direction. Thanks to altcoins we have already observed the inexorable death of many PoW coins which are “mined out” and fade away. Bitcoin would have to be the exception to this rule in order to survive.
For me, and perhaps for you too given your use of the word “supposedly”, the greatest immutable property is the blockchain ledger itself, and not the money supply. Indeed I struggle with the term “digital scarcity” and have thought it oxymoronic.
2 Likes
I mentioned this to Adam now that most people prefer to think of Bitcoin as a digital gold for hoarding. He was a little hand wavey here and defended with semantics by loosening the definition of “cash” more than is probably reasonable.
1 Like
I want digital gold to be in the hands of the people, but in fact only a small percentage are hodlers. The major players are mainly funds and banking divisions. the battle is lost, we are waiting for loans in cryptocurrency.
3 Likes
I think that speaks volumes about Blockstream’s interests. And, hand-waving away or overlooking the “separate state from money” intention has disastrous consequencies.
Why does money need to be separated from the state? I’ve always favored this explanation since I first read it six years ago: Monetary Policy - Grin Documentation
Particularly this line:
Removing central authorities with arbitrary control is much more what makes Bitcoin important than the arbitrary amount of its capped supply.
If BTC now has centralized authorities in its development process, in its mining infrastructure, as well as in its supply distribution - it’s only a matter of time before these parties determine together that some immutable properties of its design are more mutable than others.
2 Likes
To make free markets work, bitcoin can be used as an asset inside banking system, taxes must be paid anyway 
1 Like
This brings to mind P/S ratios. Based on 7 day average fees, annualised, how many years would it take the total sum of transaction fees to match the current market capitalisation of any given cryptocurrency? (this interesting metric reminds me a little of P/E ratios in traditional markets)
For Bitcoin the answer is 1418 years over 10,000 years (see below) - ouch!
source: https://cryptofees.info/
EDIT: The numbers on the site have not been updated in a while I guess and are horribly out of date. But I’d guess since MC is almost 50% up since the site stopped updating, and txn fees are probably similar to what they were, that the P/S ratio is now well over 2000 years
Which is crazy and utterly insane when you think about it
EDIT: Awww crap its hella worse than that! According to Bitcoin Total Transaction Fees Per Day Daily Analysis: Bitcoin Statistics | YCharts BTC now brings in as little as $500K a day in transaction fees. A good day is $1M. The P/S calculated in the screen was based on $2.5M
This would mean today’s P/S ratio for Bitcoin would be well over 5000 years. If someone wants to do the maths that’d be great lol 
UPDATE: Given today’s BTC MC of $1,894,662,769,313 and April 27th’s daily transaction fees of $488,094 the answer is … 10,634 years
3 Likes
I agree. The initial implementation of the money printer should also be the last one. A transparent and tamperproof printer has clearly defined supply for every height from genesis. If the Bitcoin emission model doesn’t work, something else will.
This is why running a few different experiments is important.
Bitcoin = first (digital) hard-cap currency
Grin = first (digital) time-cap currency
5 Likes
The laptop broke the screen, but its functioned is okay and it is still worked, so I continued to use it.
The main thing is that Express VPN runs on this laptop, and only through the VPN I can go to the X platform to see external news.
ps: grin price go down,make me bankrupt and had no money to buy a new laptop.the better way is grin price pump up
there are some anon crypto with zero-knowledge technology,are they better after Grin?
I do agree that, electronic cash should be Competitor of fiat currencies，but BTC is a asset,USDT is a fiat .
I get it,the one is bitcoin now,it will be grin one day. 
1.bitcoin is better than gold
2.grin is better than grin
3.peopeo need time to know1,need more time to know 2