|
|
|
|
|
|
by ric2b
2672 days ago
|
|
|
> But, this change didn't pass, because the 4 or 5 people who controlled the bitcoin core github repository, and reference client disagreed with the changes, it prevented it from happening. This is blatant re-writing of history. A fork was written, Bitcoin Cash, but most people/miners/companies didn't want to use it. It was widely known and the differences/advantages/disadvantages were discussed ad nauseum for months/years. A Github repo can't force people to run it's code instead of another. > And this was in spite of the fact that almost every single major player in the space wanted this change. So why did they keep running Bitcoin Core instead of the fork? |
|
|
Because it turns out that controlling a github repo is a very powerful power.
> A fork was written, Bitcoin Cash
This has nothing to do with Bitcoin Cash. This has to do with 2XSegwit. An initiative that was supported by every single major miner, all of the exchanges (coinbase, gemini, kraken, ect), as well as the major merchant payment processors (IE, bitpay, and all the others).
There are statements after statements made by all of these players, where they stated support for it. Unfortunately, it seems like the people who control the bitcoin protocol, the developers, had too much power, though.
Did you disagree that every major miner, and Bitcoin business like coinbase and BitPay, put out messages in support of the 2X Segwit agreement?