As the SegWit2x implementation inches closer, CoinGeek and other media outlets are taking a stand: Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin as envisioned in the original Satoshi whitepaper.

Forks are a politically charged yet inevitable necessity for the blockchain: they allow a demonstration of possible solutions for issues, and a real-life testing of proposals. And as we have earlier stated, we have concluded that Bitcoin Cash is the most efficient solution to Bitcoin’s scaling issue that, at the same time, remains true to the core values and principles behind Bitcoin.

Bitcoin Cash reverted to the unadulterated form of the blockchain to stay as true to Satoshi’s vision: replace-by-fee was removed, the signatures are preserved, transactions are kept irreversible, fees are kept low, and the block size is increased to accommodate more users and keep transaction processes fast. It has its own market price, mining network, and maintains the same history as the original chain before its August 1, 2017 hard fork, but a unique transaction history from there.

On the other hand, the coin that “SegWit Core” (now the more accurate description of what was the “Bitcoin Core” development group) insists on is no longer the Bitcoin envisioned by Satoshi’s whitepaper—the only reason the SegWit chain acquired the name Bitcoin (BTC) is largely due to the support of some miners and the businesses relying on them, as opposed to those that chose to reject SegWit after recognizing its deficiencies and its misconstruction of “Bitcoin.” It is Bitcoin Cash that remains faithful to Satoshi principles that conceptualized Bitcoin.

Official Statement: Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin

SegWit2x is a premature update done in haste. The SegWit2x code is flawed and has not undergone sufficient vetting, making the upcoming hard fork a rash decision with potentially catastrophic consequences. The deficiencies in SegWit2x’s protocol would open the Bitcoin blockchain up to several angles of attack—consequences of which will be suffered mainly by users and exchanges through massive losses. It’s a grave irresponsibility to allow users’ deposits, and the Bitcoin system as a whole, to be at risk for the sake of this power grab.

As far as the scaling debate goes, it is becoming apparent to more organizations that SegWit was never the best solution. The update lacks substantial functionalities and improvements to even warrant a hard fork in the first place— SegWit2x does not solve Bitcoin’s scaling needs for the long term. So this upcoming SegWit2x hard fork offers minimal benefits compared to its risks.

SegWit Core proposes a mere 2Mb block size stretch—this won’t hold the volume of transactions for long, and we will all be facing the exact same predicament we are in now within a few months’ time. Contrary to SegWit supporters’ arguments against bigger blocks, it has been proven that massive scaling is attainable—by a test run using one of SegWit’s main rival propositions in the scaling debate: Blockchain Unlimited (BU).

For the first time, a 1.0001GB block was successfully mined on the Gigablock Testnet, proving ultimately that massive scaling of blocks is possible. The results of this test will be implemented by Bitcoin Cash in the future. 

Having considered the circumstances, we will be following the nomenclature below from this point forward.

Bitcoin will refer to Bitcoin Cash which is traded as BCH.

Branches no longer considered Bitcoin: 

SegWit, SegWit Core, or Segwit1X(BTC/SW1) – These chains have high transaction fees and business model not determined. Possible uses as institutional value transfer system; removes digital signature data, reversible transactions, users have to compete for miners by offering higher fees to get their transactions processed. 

Segwit2X(SW2) – it’s the same as SegWit but with the block size increase to 2Mb. 

Bitcoin Gold, or SegWit Gold(SWG) – it’s the same as Segwit 1X but with no side chains; intends to change the proof-of-work algorithm, which may ultimately end in the loss of the mining community.

To read more about the history and the reasons why we’re taking this stand, please read our About Bitcoin page.