BCH follows the white paper. BTC does not follow the white paper. Reading the white paper over and over should give you a true sense of what Satoshi would call Bitcoin. This is about what follows the instructions and road map. You can't change the engineering plan of a Lamborghini to look like a Beetle and still call it a Lamborghini. BCH stayed true to the white paper. BTC added segwit which was an unwise thing to do if you know anything about mining and programming. BTC became a coin with signatures off chain and took off the personal signatures of the people sending a transaction. This simple change in programming undermined the whole purpose of digital signatures that made Bitcoin unique. BTC is not unique anymore.
If the Bitcoin white paper says bitcoin is DEFINED as "digital signatures on chain" and segwit takes digital signatures off chain, can BTC still honestly call itself Bitcoin? BCH is the only Bitcoin of the white paper.
If you know the difference, Resteem this to share the awareness. Resteeming is free, and it's the easiest way to help a minnow especially if you are a minnow. Our voting power may be low, but our Resteeming power is high
Ever heard about consensus? Bcash split off with less than 5% consensus and Satoshi designed the system so that you need more than 50% consensus but better close to 100% to upgrate the network. This means that Bcash is a failed upgrade and the image you show is technically wrong. Since you call BCH Bitcoin in your title and this is misleading for newbies and technically false I flag your post.
Blockstream kicked out the teams from Bitcoin ABC, XT, Unlimited, nChain, BitPrim and Classic. They kicked all the nodes out that weren't running Core and they revoked all of the developers and stopped their nodes from confirming blocks.
Then Blockstream created a new coin with stripped-out digital signatures, created Segwit Coin and got CME, Gemini and the regulators from NYC to agree that the new coin would retain the XBT/BTC ticker. It was basically a coup d'etat. Even Coinbase and Bitfinex said they would support B2X if it would stop Blockstream from cutting out every other developer from Bitcoin. That's also why they were slow to activate Segwit. They were all against the coup d'etat against the original Bitcoin chain and the removal of all dissenting developers and nodes.
You don't think it's bizarre that in 2017, there were like 10 teams of Bitcoin developers working on Core, and in 2018 there's only one team and everyone's keys are revoked if they aren't a Blockstream employee?
You are clearly rewriting history, I followed everything very closely and this is not what happened. You don't see how well Bitcoin is doing now Segwit is implemented? This is blocked for more than a year by guys like you. Go investigate and learn about consensus.
You gonna keep censoring like a statist bootlicking bitch? Remove your downvote. It's financial aggresssion.
Im invested in Bitcoin and you guys copied the code and try to steel the name Bitcoin and lie to trick others into this scam. This is not censoring, this is defending my property rights, an individual action because guys like you are threatening my wealth and chance for freedom in the future (its like copying an iPhone and claiming it is an iPhone, people invested in apple will stand up to that without the state). Bitcoin brandname belongs to Bitcoin and if you try to scam people to believe your alt coin is Bitcoin you are steeling from my investment and all the core devs their work. I use my Steem power to stand up to that, this is just the market. If you change your title to 'Bitcoin Cash BCH' it is just a dumb article and no fraud / scam anymore, so then I will remove the downvote.
It's OPEN SOURCE. Satoshi made it open source for a reason. Fully open source. So tyrants like you can't claim a monopoly on the technology. BCH is for free people.
Yes it is open source and yes you can copy it, but copying something and then give it the original name is not done, it is theft (and on top of that you mislead people). In my iPhone example, when you copy the iPhone and give it another name, change some things and say that you think you are improving it through your vision I would say do whatever you like and I will not care if it is against the law by government. But when you claim it is the real iPhone I as an investor will take action to protect my asset, no matter if it is against the government law or not. In a world without government (what is my wish too) you still have to behave, and if you don't people will take action against you. Claiming that BCH is Bitcoin is theft from all Bitcoin investors, and we will protect our property.
It's an unrecognizable coin to the white paper. Blockstream might get sued for betraying the white paper and investors without changing it's white paper. You make that drastic of a change that contradicts the white paper, you must revise the white paper. Otherwise you are fraudulent to the investors. Non-techies don't understand this.
Ever heard of the NAP motherfucker?
You just planted 0.07 tree(s)!
Thanks to @cpnjacksparrow
We have planted already 3715.16 trees
out of 1,000,000
Let's save and restore Abongphen Highland Forest
in Cameroonian village Kedjom-Keku!
Plant trees with @treeplanter and get paid for it!
My Steem Power = 18869.13
Thanks a lot!
@martin.mikes coordinator of @kedjom-keku