Everyone here is aware of the debate in the Bitcoin community over whether, and how, to increase the block size. The controversy has been boiling under the surface for two years now, but has recently become especially bitter. The primary dev of Bitcoin Core, Gavin, has split from the project and joined the Bitcoin XT team, as have several other prominent devs. Bitcoin XT is simply a fork of Bitcoin Core, in which everything stays exactly the same until 75% of the Bitcoin network begins using Bitcoin XT, at which time a block size increase will be activated by the software. At the present time, anybody operating Bitcoin XT is still running the same protocol and still supporting the same network as those who use Bitcoin Core.
Things have gotten even worse lately, with the "owner" of the two largest community sites (Theymos, who is in charge of bitcointalk and /r/bitcoin) actively censoring any discussion at all of Bitcoin XT specifically or block size increases in general. Theymos recently went so far as to pen a letter to the Bitcoin community in which he states that he will continue to censor all discussion of Bitcoin XT or block size changes, even if 90% of the community comes out in favor of such changes: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/
The Bitcoin community is horribly divided, although Theymos' censorship efforts seem to be pushing people toward the Bitcoin XT camp. It is almost unthinkable at this point, with such polarization, that a true and complete consensus will form. Additionally, you have someone claiming to be Satoshi, supposedly using Satoshi's actual email address (see Theymos' post above), who is saying that if Bitcoin XT is adopted, he will consider Bitcoin to have failed. If this is Satoshi (although why doesn't he sign with a cryptographic key?), then the implications could be truly dire: even if a catastrophic fork is averted, an angry Satoshi could easily crash the price of Bitcoin by selling off his holdings. The effect of so many bitcoins rushing into the marketplace at once would be dire, but the psychological overhand of his disapproval would likely be even worse.
When we ignore the pretend-cryptocurrency that is Ripple, we can see that Bitcoin comprises 89% of the market cap of the crypto sphere. Virtually all exchanges price altcoins, including Dash, in Bitcoin. The only way to purchase most altcoins, including Dash, is to first purchase Bitcoin. The collapse of Bitcoin could absolutely devastate the public perception of cryptocurrency/digital money.
On the other hand, problems in Bitcoin-land could point the public to a competitor, like Dash, that addresses the problems which are plaguing Bitcoin. Right now we have working anonymity, instant transactions, decentralized governance by blockchain, and greater scalability (with more to come in this area).
What do y'all think? Would the end of Bitcoin doom crypto for good? For awhile? Or would things pivot our way?
P.S. I suppose I should define what I mean by a Bitcoin "collapse." Let's define that as any situation which results in either the formation of two roughly equal (in market cap) versions of Bitcoin, or in the value of Bitcoin declining by more than 75%.
Things have gotten even worse lately, with the "owner" of the two largest community sites (Theymos, who is in charge of bitcointalk and /r/bitcoin) actively censoring any discussion at all of Bitcoin XT specifically or block size increases in general. Theymos recently went so far as to pen a letter to the Bitcoin community in which he states that he will continue to censor all discussion of Bitcoin XT or block size changes, even if 90% of the community comes out in favor of such changes: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/
The Bitcoin community is horribly divided, although Theymos' censorship efforts seem to be pushing people toward the Bitcoin XT camp. It is almost unthinkable at this point, with such polarization, that a true and complete consensus will form. Additionally, you have someone claiming to be Satoshi, supposedly using Satoshi's actual email address (see Theymos' post above), who is saying that if Bitcoin XT is adopted, he will consider Bitcoin to have failed. If this is Satoshi (although why doesn't he sign with a cryptographic key?), then the implications could be truly dire: even if a catastrophic fork is averted, an angry Satoshi could easily crash the price of Bitcoin by selling off his holdings. The effect of so many bitcoins rushing into the marketplace at once would be dire, but the psychological overhand of his disapproval would likely be even worse.
When we ignore the pretend-cryptocurrency that is Ripple, we can see that Bitcoin comprises 89% of the market cap of the crypto sphere. Virtually all exchanges price altcoins, including Dash, in Bitcoin. The only way to purchase most altcoins, including Dash, is to first purchase Bitcoin. The collapse of Bitcoin could absolutely devastate the public perception of cryptocurrency/digital money.
On the other hand, problems in Bitcoin-land could point the public to a competitor, like Dash, that addresses the problems which are plaguing Bitcoin. Right now we have working anonymity, instant transactions, decentralized governance by blockchain, and greater scalability (with more to come in this area).
What do y'all think? Would the end of Bitcoin doom crypto for good? For awhile? Or would things pivot our way?
P.S. I suppose I should define what I mean by a Bitcoin "collapse." Let's define that as any situation which results in either the formation of two roughly equal (in market cap) versions of Bitcoin, or in the value of Bitcoin declining by more than 75%.
