Editor's Note: This article comes fromhash pie(ID: hashpai), author: hashpai, forwarded with authorization.
Editor's Note: This article comes from
hash piehash pie。
(ID: hashpai), author: hashpai, forwarded with authorization.Whether from a business perspective or a development perspective, splitting is not the best choice for BCH at the moment.When multiple stakeholders are involved, it is easy to cause disagreement, which leads to the split of the blockchain, especially when they have both code development capabilities and mining computing power
On the first anniversary of the birth of Bitcoin Cash, bitcoin ABC and nChain, which originally belonged to the same camp, once again had disputes over expansion and route issues.
The core of the controversy this time is the difference between the big block and the bigger block; it is the contradiction between the two development paths of public chain; it is the game between radicals and conservatives
;From 8MB to 32MB and then to 128MB, what reason does CSW insist on achieving unlimited expansion? In an eventful year of financial distress and a troubled IPO, will Bitmain watch BCH split? Can they still rely on their computing power advantage to keep their hard-earned results?
first level title
The foreshadowing of the BCH controversy was planted as early as the end of July. Bitcoin ABC disclosed the team’s upgrade schedule in the last week of July. They plan to release the 0.18 version of the code base in mid-August to lay the foundation for subsequent upgrades. In this regard, CSW was the first to jump out against it. nChain announced the development of the Bitcoin SV protocol on August 16, and defined it as the realization of "Satoshi vision". The contents of the protocol include:
Re-enable the original OP codes of Bitcoin, including OP_MUL, OP_LSHIFT, OP_RSHIFT and OP_INVERT;
Removed the limit of 201 opcodes per script;And increase the block size to 128MB.。
image description
Image source: nchain.comCSW said that after the block size is expanded to 128MB, they will try to expand the block size to infinity。
nChain’s plan has the backing of CoinGeek, one of the largest mining pools for BCH. CoinGeek stated that they will work to restore the original design of the Bitcoin protocol and will support this change in the November 2018 upgrade.
The official outbreak of the dispute was half a month after nChain released the roadmap. On August 30, Bitcoin ABC released a detailed hard fork plan, and they will implement the upgrade of version 0.18.0 on November 15.
Among them, they also proposed two modifications, namely the standard transaction order (Canonical transaction ordering) and the use of a new OP code: OP_CHECKDATASIG; however, these two points are exactly the two changes that CoinGeek expressly opposed in the statement
image description
It's worth noting here that:
Bitmain introduces a standard transaction order to facilitate better expansion of the system in the future; unlike Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin ABC believes that the current block size of 32MB is reasonable in the face of the hard top of hardware equipment, and there is no need to continue to expand .
OP_CHECKDATASIG can optimize the BCH scripting language, allow the verification of information from outside the blockchain, facilitate the application of oracles and cross-chain atomic contracts, and facilitate the deployment of smart contracts and side chain technologies in the future. nChain, which has always adhered to the large block route, believes that Bitcoin Cash is a peer-to-peer payment system whose main function is payment. Therefore, the public chain development strategy of smart contracts + side chain technology is completely part of the original intention of BCH. Contrary to each other.
Since then, Bitcoin ABC and nChain have formally formed opposing camps. Judging from the relationship between the main figures of the two camps, it seems that the possibility of them reaching a consensus to upgrade the agreement seems to be very small, and the split of BCH can be seen.first level title。
Wu Jihan seems to have never waited to see CSW
When talking about CSW, the chief scientist of nChain, we have to mention the "glorious history" of him impersonating Satoshi Nakamoto. On May 2, 2016, Craig S. Wright from Australia posted on his blog that he is the father of Bitcoin "Satoshi Nakamoto", and he also provided early email records and encrypted signatures to prove his identity; and at the 2016 Consensus Conference, Gavin Andresen, the Bitcoin code manager personally referred to by Satoshi Nakamoto, and the chief scientist of the Bitcoin Foundation, Gavin Andresen, also came forward to prove that CSW used the private key of the first block in front of him. Signed and expressed belief that it is the real Satoshi Nakamoto.
However, the public evidence provided by CSW seems to be technically and cryptographically untenable, and was quickly overturned by cryptographic experts.Until today, whether this Mr. Craig Wright is really Satoshi Nakamoto himself is still an unsolved mystery
In this BCH controversy, CSW's attitude and position were very firm. He not only stated that he would not add replay protection to the hard fork in November, but also tweeted publicly:
"The development path of BCH is very clear. We choose to continue to expand. If bitcoin ABC does not follow our footsteps, we will make it perish."And Jihan Wu seems to have never had a good impression of this "Australian Satoshi Nakamoto"
. In the "Wang Feng Ten Questions" program in June this year, Wu Jihan said bluntly:
At the beginning of September, after Bitcoin ABC announced that it would implement an upgrade plan different from Bitcoin SV in November, the controversy over how BCH would develop in the future reached a fever pitch.
. In the face of CSW's constant "provocations", Wu Jihan publicly questioned the exaggerated content of nChain and CoinGeek's propaganda, and bluntly said that Coingeek employs fiction writers, not journalists.
In view of the extremely low reputation of CSW in the currency circle, even V God also came out to stand in line and said:
"In order to avoid splitting, the BCH community should not compromise with CSW, but should regard this dispute as an opportunity to completely exclude and kick it out of the community."first level titleThe duel between "Australian Satoshi Nakamoto" and the mining overlord
In fact, regarding the development prospects of BCH, the differences between Graig Wright and Bitmain have long existed. At the end of 2017, CSW made it clear that he hopes that in 2018, BCH can open up the right to use more Op codes without limiting the block size. In this way, BCH is exactly what Bitcoin was originally designed by Satoshi Nakamoto.
As the only person currently insisting on claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto, CSW does have a reason to do so;To win the trust of more Bitcoin believers by choosing sides on political positions and sticking to the public opinion gimmick of Satoshi Nakamoto's original codeBitmain, the initiator of the birth of BCH, has been emphasizing from the beginning to the end that even if BCH does not implement segregated witness, they can also implement smart contracts and side chain projects, so it can be seen that Wu Jihan's biggest ambition from the beginning is to use BCH Push on a public chain road.
As early as the end of July this year, Bitmain developers have launched a new BCH-based
"Wormhole Protocol", which can realize smart contract functions such as the issuance, transfer and burning of tokens without changing the consensus rules
. The system is attached to the BCH network, and BCH can be exchanged for the token WHC in the Wormhole Protocol to operate smart contracts. As of September 12, 180 Tokens have been issued on the BCH mainnet.
image descriptionImage source: Wormhole.com。
The Hash faction believes that the BCH controversy is so good,
Image credit: coin.dance
The main reason is that nChain and Bitcoin ABC not only have the ability to develop codes, but more importantly, they have the support of large mining pools behind them
At present, the mining pool that clearly supports nChain is CoinGeek, which has the largest computing power among the current BCH mining pools. According to the data of coin. Pool, the total computing power supporting CWS has reached about 41.6%; in contrast, the total computing power of Bitmain’s Antpool and BTC.COM mining BCH in BCH is about 14.7%, even if ViaBTC is added, the total computing power is not enough 30%. In this way, Bitmain does not seem to have any advantage.
image descriptionImage credit: coin.danceAnd how much money does nChain need to invest to gain a firm foothold for BCH, which is eager to develop according to their vision? A more embarrassing question is whether they really have so much money.
In April 2017, nChain was acquired by SICAV plc, a high-tech private equity fund.
At that time, they only received an investment of 300 million U.S. dollars. Compared with Bitmain’s valuation of 18 billion U.S. dollars, nChain’s financial situation seems to be very different.first level titleBCH wants to split, can Bitmain agree?
in the previous"Behind the IPO Scenery of Bitmain: A Generation of Mining Tyrants Can't Escape the Fate of Being Cut Leeks"In this article, we analyzed that Bitmain currently holds more than 1 million BCHs, and these tokens cannot be liquidated in a short period of time. In order to prevent these encrypted assets from becoming liabilities, Bitmain has to continue to invest in mining machines and electricity to maintain Operation of BCH. From the perspective of income, only when BCH develops in a positive direction can they get out of the current predicament. Therefore, Bitmain will not sit back and watch the split of BCH and remain indifferent.
Even if there is a short-term disadvantage in computing power, it does not mean that Bitmain will definitely lose in this computing power struggle. After all, most of the computing power controlled by Bitmain is still in the Bitcoin mining pool.
Based on the current computing power, Antpool, BTC.COM, and ViaBTC have a total of 41.9% of the computing power of Bitcoin, which is about 21.06Ehash/s, and these computing power is equivalent to 5.58 times the current computing power of Bitcoin Cash. In the face of such a computing power advantage, even if CoinGeek and BMG mining pools go all out, their split coins will most likely not escape the fate of early death.image descriptionImage source: bitinfocharts.com。
In the bear market where the price of Bitcoin keeps falling, mining revenue is constantly being compressed,
For Bitmain, it is not a loss-making business to switch computing power at this time to ensure the status of BCH. In addition to Jihan Wu and Bitmain holding a large amount of BCH,。
The falling price of mining machines is another major economic driving force for them to maintain the status and price of BCH
However, at present, according to Bitmain’s official website,
Ant mining machine S9 has been lowered from 10,000 yuan at the beginning of the year to 5,600 yuan; S9i mining machine has also been lowered from 6,500 yuan in May to 3,350 yuan. In the case of shrinking mining machine income, the most urgent task is to ensure its mining income, and in the endless decline of currency prices, it is definitely not possible to split BCH to ensure mining income
In addition, Andrew Stone, the lead developer of Bitcoin Unlimited (BU), also stated that he believes that Bitcoin Cash supporters need to unite. Therefore, they are working hard to modify the code and work on merging the changes of Bitcoin ABC and nChain to develop two consensus-compatible BIP135 protocols. Miners can vote to activate a compromise that is compatible with both.This is also a means to avoid the split of BCH.。
When the debate between Bitcoin ABC and Nchain was in full swing, Cobra, who suddenly tweeted on March 6 this year and announced his support for BCH, said,
Image credit: coin.dance
He will launch a BCH full-node client before the start of the hard fork on November 15, which will not change the existing consensus mechanism of BCH. More importantly, Cobra said that he has obtained the support of 25% of the computing power
Here, the reason why we put Cobra at the end is that there is a very important reason that it is still doubtful whether it really has 25% computing power support. Judging from the current data, CSW and Bitmain hold a total of 65.2% of the computing power, plus the already declared neutral Rawpool mining pool and the BTC.TOP and BCH blockchains owned by Jiang Zhuoer, a loyal supporter of Bitmain. The remaining computing power is less than 20%.
image description
Image credit: coin.dance
So in the end we can roughly summarize the development of Bitcoin Cash after the November 15 hard fork into the following situations:
1. The situation of the split: nChain and Bitcoin ABC are at a stalemate, and two completely different Bitcoin Cash chains, BCN and BCA, are split;
2. The case of not splitting:
