There will never be a successful bitcoin fork just as BCH failed. Not because of any principles or people voting with nodes but because the name is not Bitcoin (BTC). People want the thing they know and familiar with.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I think I disagree. Bitcoin works because of it's perfectly balanced incentive structures. These forks all fuck with that balance. Their failed designs are why they fail, not their name

Name has way more to do with it than anyone realizes

I hope that's not true. But maybe you're right

Case in point eth classic …

ETH Classic isn't to ETH, what BCH/BSV are to BTC...

In the ETH case both are shit, so it all comes down to marketing. There I agree with you.

With BTC one is actually designed specifically for a purpose (digital commodity money) and the other is shit. One is winning because of its functional properties, not because of marketing.

Bitcoin Cash tried so hard to just be called "Bitcoin" while renaming "Bitcoin" to "Bitcoin Core". It didn't work.

Ya

Btc is perfect. Do not tamper with what is perfect in design

Hmm... perhaps.

I think the best money wins though too. The hardest, most battle tested money wins out.

Eventually someone will try to fork to "a better nostr" as well. It's inevitable. Will that fork succeed, most likely not.

No

bookmarked for later 😜

Eh a fork doesn't really exist in a social consensus. For example the Nostr clients with Monero tipping - still Nostr.

Also, no one will catch up with hash rate