Hahah you are spewing the same mentality CNN had about Trump since he went down the escalator until he won in 2016.
The market is forever changing. Did the market overwhelmingly reject Trump in favor of Joe Biden or did Joe Biden and his voter fraud organization hijack the white house?
The 'market' is controlled by the cabal.. BCH is the real bitcoin. The crippled protocol we call Bitcoin now can be controlled and contained - that's why they let it run. BCH could be used for everyday purchases as well as bank transfers.
Marxists took over Bitcoin and added anti-commerce vectors like REPLACE BY FEE, strangled the network throughout by limiting max amount of transactions per block to a total of ~1MB and added a extra layer of complexity with something called Lightning network on top that requires a third party to fund a "channel" for others to be able to send money through that channel.
The real Bitcoin that allows real p2p electronic cash is still alive and well in the form of Bitcoin Cash, but the network effect and censorship have already gone global.
The proof is in the pudding. It is not possible to use Bitcoin BTC as peer to peer electronic cash as Satoshi laid out the technology and the invention back in 2008 with the publication of the Whitepaper.
If what you say is true you ought to be able to say it coherently and peacefully without resorting to a swarm of links.
Many Bitcoin forks fail even if they have "Bitcoin" in the name. The extraordinary claim that Bitcoin is out of Satoshi's hands now but an upstart startup is actually truer to his vision requires extraordinary evidence, not invocation of Groucho's long-lost brother.
So I started to play with Grok now that it is publicly available for free and was able to have it create this timeline:
Here's a timeline in plain English of how Bitcoin (BTC) evolved away from functioning as peer-to-peer electronic cash and the events leading to the creation of Bitcoin Cash (BCH):
2009: Bitcoin is launched by Satoshi Nakamoto. It's envisioned as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, allowing direct transactions without intermediaries.
2010: Bitcoin's block size is informally limited to 1MB by Satoshi to prevent spam transactions. This wasn't meant to be a permanent cap but was adopted as such later.
2013: Discussions about Bitcoin's scalability begin. The 1MB block size limit starts to be seen as a bottleneck, causing delays and higher fees during peak usage.
2015: "Replace-by-Fee" (RBF) is introduced. This allows users to replace an unconfirmed transaction with another that has a higher fee to incentivize miners to process it faster. Some see this as moving away from the simplicity of peer-to-peer cash.
2016: Segregated Witness (SegWit) is proposed as a soft fork to increase the block capacity by moving signature data outside the base block. While it technically increases capacity, it's not the straightforward block size increase some were hoping for, and it's seen as a compromise.
July 2017: After heated debates and failed attempts to agree on scaling solutions, Bitcoin Cash (BCH) splits from Bitcoin. BCH increases the block size to 8MB (later to 32MB), aiming to restore Bitcoin's original purpose as an electronic cash system with lower fees and faster transactions.
Post-Split:
Bitcoin (BTC): Continues to evolve with a focus on security, decentralization, and as a store of value or "digital gold." The community largely accepts SegWit, and later, the Lightning Network is promoted as a layer-2 solution for scalability, moving away from the original vision of direct blockchain transactions for everyday use.
Bitcoin Cash (BCH): Maintains a focus on being peer-to-peer electronic cash with larger blocks, aiming for low fees and high transaction throughput. BCH introduces adjustable block size, allowing for future increases if needed, in contrast to Bitcoin's more conservative approach.
This timeline shows how Bitcoin's evolution led to a divergence in philosophy and technical approach, with BCH attempting to stay true to the original vision of peer-to-peer electronic cash while BTC has taken a path more focused on security and value storage.
There is a summary video made from that book that explains the history of the in-fighting that happened in the community where one side wanted to scale with allowing more transactions per block.
You might also want to be aware that initially there were no block size limit either, but this was added as a temporary solution to the network because someone was concerned that Bitcoin would fail because of so-called spam attacks. So Satoshi initially agreed to add a temporary maximum limit on each block at 1MB with a clear strategy for the future though an example like this:
“We can phase in a change later if we get closer to needing it.”
And again:
“It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.”
The problem since then is that the developers that hijacked the codebase never allowed for this to get implemented and thus the blocksize is still stuck at one megabyte per block, cascading the problems even more.
The same developers promised to increase the size of the blocks, but since people had lost faith in their honesty due to large amount of censorship and propaganda on the subreddit named r/Bitcoin, a new subreddit named r/BTC was created that primarily focused on free speech to counter the stifled discussions. It is still the main counterpart to the original Bitcoin Subreddit. Mind you the subreddit was created before the split happened that divided Bitcoin into the Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) hence the reason why the subreddit named r/btc mainly promotes the BCH ticker/Fork named Bitcoin Cash
The in-fighting in the Bitcoin community at large continued though and since the divide and conquer plan worked so well for the powers that be, a man named Craig Wright was suddenly inserted into the mix dividing the BCH community even further and ended up creating a new fork from the already forked BCH ticker called BSV. Craig claimed for a long time that he was Satoshi, but were only able to convince a few people for a limited amount of time. he had billionaire funding though and was able to go on for a long time. He have now been court ordered to put in his website that he is not Satoshi though.
So basically at that point there is a bunch or Austrian economic leaning OG bitcoiners that wanted to keep the scalability on chain despite the censorship and marxist propaganda to block it with their BCH fork and people with more Marxist leaning mindset that touted the virtue that "everybody should be able to run a node" when Satoshi himself said that mining would be a more specialized field as the network grew.
There is more to the story in the book and video linked in this comment, but I'm on the phone so very complicated to write a long detailed comment like this already.
Hope this is answers your request to a large degree though.
LOL. No.
Replace by fee is real, thus yes.
You are promoting BCH which the market overwhelmingly rejected. Anything else you say is therefore irrelevant.
Hahah you are spewing the same mentality CNN had about Trump since he went down the escalator until he won in 2016.
The market is forever changing. Did the market overwhelmingly reject Trump in favor of Joe Biden or did Joe Biden and his voter fraud organization hijack the white house?
It's the same picture.
The 'market' is controlled by the cabal.. BCH is the real bitcoin. The crippled protocol we call Bitcoin now can be controlled and contained - that's why they let it run. BCH could be used for everyday purchases as well as bank transfers.
FUD
Replace by fee is not FUD. it is a intentional destruction of technology.
RTFM
TL;DR:
Marxists took over Bitcoin and added anti-commerce vectors like REPLACE BY FEE, strangled the network throughout by limiting max amount of transactions per block to a total of ~1MB and added a extra layer of complexity with something called Lightning network on top that requires a third party to fund a "channel" for others to be able to send money through that channel.
The real Bitcoin that allows real p2p electronic cash is still alive and well in the form of Bitcoin Cash, but the network effect and censorship have already gone global.
The proof is in the pudding. It is not possible to use Bitcoin BTC as peer to peer electronic cash as Satoshi laid out the technology and the invention back in 2008 with the publication of the Whitepaper.
If what you say is true you ought to be able to say it coherently and peacefully without resorting to a swarm of links.
Many Bitcoin forks fail even if they have "Bitcoin" in the name. The extraordinary claim that Bitcoin is out of Satoshi's hands now but an upstart startup is actually truer to his vision requires extraordinary evidence, not invocation of Groucho's long-lost brother.
So I started to play with Grok now that it is publicly available for free and was able to have it create this timeline:
Here's a timeline in plain English of how Bitcoin (BTC) evolved away from functioning as peer-to-peer electronic cash and the events leading to the creation of Bitcoin Cash (BCH):
Post-Split:
Bitcoin (BTC): Continues to evolve with a focus on security, decentralization, and as a store of value or "digital gold." The community largely accepts SegWit, and later, the Lightning Network is promoted as a layer-2 solution for scalability, moving away from the original vision of direct blockchain transactions for everyday use.
Bitcoin Cash (BCH): Maintains a focus on being peer-to-peer electronic cash with larger blocks, aiming for low fees and high transaction throughput. BCH introduces adjustable block size, allowing for future increases if needed, in contrast to Bitcoin's more conservative approach.
This timeline shows how Bitcoin's evolution led to a divergence in philosophy and technical approach, with BCH attempting to stay true to the original vision of peer-to-peer electronic cash while BTC has taken a path more focused on security and value storage.
That is exactly the attempt in the tldr summary.
A book called 'Hijacking Bitcoin' have also been written about exactly this.
There is a summary video made from that book that explains the history of the in-fighting that happened in the community where one side wanted to scale with allowing more transactions per block.
One of the first things that started the trouble was a developer named Peter Todd that created a change to be able to replace transactions using a higher fee.
You might also want to be aware that initially there were no block size limit either, but this was added as a temporary solution to the network because someone was concerned that Bitcoin would fail because of so-called spam attacks. So Satoshi initially agreed to add a temporary maximum limit on each block at 1MB with a clear strategy for the future though an example like this:
And again:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.”
The problem since then is that the developers that hijacked the codebase never allowed for this to get implemented and thus the blocksize is still stuck at one megabyte per block, cascading the problems even more.
The same developers promised to increase the size of the blocks, but since people had lost faith in their honesty due to large amount of censorship and propaganda on the subreddit named r/Bitcoin, a new subreddit named r/BTC was created that primarily focused on free speech to counter the stifled discussions. It is still the main counterpart to the original Bitcoin Subreddit. Mind you the subreddit was created before the split happened that divided Bitcoin into the Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) hence the reason why the subreddit named r/btc mainly promotes the BCH ticker/Fork named Bitcoin Cash
The in-fighting in the Bitcoin community at large continued though and since the divide and conquer plan worked so well for the powers that be, a man named Craig Wright was suddenly inserted into the mix dividing the BCH community even further and ended up creating a new fork from the already forked BCH ticker called BSV. Craig claimed for a long time that he was Satoshi, but were only able to convince a few people for a limited amount of time. he had billionaire funding though and was able to go on for a long time. He have now been court ordered to put in his website that he is not Satoshi though.
So basically at that point there is a bunch or Austrian economic leaning OG bitcoiners that wanted to keep the scalability on chain despite the censorship and marxist propaganda to block it with their BCH fork and people with more Marxist leaning mindset that touted the virtue that "everybody should be able to run a node" when Satoshi himself said that mining would be a more specialized field as the network grew.
There is more to the story in the book and video linked in this comment, but I'm on the phone so very complicated to write a long detailed comment like this already.
Hope this is answers your request to a large degree though.