BTC and BCH, who is the king of value?
After reading my article on the topic of Bitcoin "scaling", a reader sent a comment on Bitcoin Cash BCH.
The main point of this reader is that from a technical point of view,BCH has solved the potential problems that Bitcoin may encounter now and in the future.I am very grateful for the readers' feedback and suggestions on our articles, and I also agree with this reader's comments.
The biggest problem Bitcoin encounters now is: sticking to the 1MB block size, and unwilling to expand the block, so it may have to cancel the halving in the future, which will lead to the collapse of Bitcoin's belief.
In this regard, BCH has adopted an approach that complies with Satoshi Nakamoto's original intention --- expanding the size of the block to accommodate more transactions. This allows BCH miners to continue to participate in mining and maintain the system even if BCH is completely mined in the future.
From this point of view, I agree with BCH's approach very much.
Actually pureFrom a technical and functional point of view, whether Bitcoin is better or BCH is better, there is no doubt now that BCH must be much better than Bitcoin, let alone the future.
But Bitcoin has been forked for so many years, and BCH has gone through so much effort, but why in the eyes of most investors in the industry, Bitcoin is still regarded as the king, while BCH is only called "the prince"?
The fundamental reason is that everyone looks at Bitcoin not from its function, but from sublimating Bitcoin into a symbol of the cryptocurrency world.This kind of symbol is like the symbol of gold in real life, and its symbolic meaning is far greater than the actual use value.
In my opinion, the symbolic meaning of Bitcoin is not replaced by a second digital currency, whether it is BCH or Ethereum or other currencies in the future.
There are several pillars underpinning Bitcoin's symbolism, one of which is the fixed cap of 21 million Bitcoins. Even outsiders who know nothing about Bitcoin and blockchain can blurt out this point. It is also one of the original intentions of Satoshi Nakamoto's design. Therefore, the history of this number and the condensed belief are too deep. If one day this pillar is gone, the symbolism of Bitcoin will be shaky.
I know that some seniors in the circle may have different views on this, and think that even if this upper limit is revised, it may not have much impact, but in my opinion, once it is changed, at least my belief in Bitcoin will collapse. I believe there are many people like me.
If one day the symbolic meaning of Bitcoin is no longer due to the modification of this upper limit, will everyone regard BCH as Bitcoin? I am afraid it will not be easy.
In the years when BCH and Bitcoin have competed for the top position, except for changing the block size, BCH has not touched the original intention of Satoshi Nakamoto's design in any other key elements, and has been continuously improving in technology and performance, so purely From the perspective of technology, parameters and performance, BCH is more in line with Satoshi Nakamoto's original intention, and it is more like the ideal "Bitcoin". But why the BCH community and team have made so much effort, but BCH is still regarded as a "prince"?
Because the current Bitcoin is the Bitcoin left by Satoshi Nakamoto before he escaped from the world. It condenses the memories of Satoshi Nakamoto and the permanent memory of the label Bitcoin in later generations. This emotion has been sublimated into a belief.
Faith cannot be changed, it will either last forever or collapse, and it cannot be replaced by a newcomer.
So I think,Once the upper limit of Bitcoin is revised, it will collapse, and it is impossible for a second digital currency to replace it.
