| > It is huge, I agree. But ridiculous in comparison to what? The current system, which is far more efficient. > a) it has low security (a collusion of only 0.5% of Bitcoin miners can perform a 51% attack on BCH) Not a critical issue, since evidently it's not happening. I'm not putting in more than I can afford to lose. > - b) the community and their 'leaders' continuously lie and mislead the public about BCHs performance, adoption and scalability (e.g. unlimited transactions without degraded decentralization)
> - c) the coin and the community splits regularly because of power grabs Completely unimportant to me. I'm not loyal to BCH or anyone else. I use whatever works at any given point in time. BCH currently seems to be the most usable for my ends, given how it performs transactions cheaply and has decent enough adoption. But if it dies, no big deal, I'll use something else. Heck, even DOGE seems to be doing okay. Plus, this is crypto. There is no such a thing as an altcoin. It's all software. Permissionless money, remember? Lies, deceit, cheating, are all fair game since there's nobody to give anybody official blessings or permission on anything. So I couldn't care less who said what or what internal drama is brewing. Does it work or does it not for my use is the only metric, and the second it stops working I'll find something else. > - d) the market's expected value of BCH drops continuously (because of the points mentioned before) No, currently it isn't. See the graphs. Plus I'm not interested in the virtual gold kind of usage. So long it more or less holds up, that works for me. |
> The current system, which is far more efficient.
You keep repeating that. Do you have any sources to back that claim?