Bitcoin may not be dead but it is becoming a bit of a hobbled corpse. This isn't an obituary but a declaration of sedition. This last attack on the Bitcoin network merely shows how fragile the system really is. It justifies all the naysayers who claim bitcoin isn't a viable alternative to traditional financial systems. As a proponent of bitcoin, I'm getting very forking tired of explaining to people what a fork is and that it's NOT a "split" like a stock and all the rest of this nonsense. In pure Public Relations terms, this forking business is holding ALL of us as financial hostages. Bitcoin will never reach mainstream levels if these forks continue to muddy the waters. Too many people lack the technical understanding to handle them, and even fewer lack the basic understanding to take advantage of the 'airdropped' altcoins produced by the forks. Essentially, forks are only helping the very few of us who understand them leaving everyone else, including the general public, even more weary of Bitcoin.
As of this writing, Bitcoin Cash has taken nearly twenty billion dollars from the bitcoin network. What could possibly spur such a massive amount of capital flight? A single piece of news published by CoinDesk made many people believe that Bitcoin had lost its core development team to Bitcoin Cash. The article sites a blog on Bitcoinclassic.com but this article is in itself a major catalyst for much of the trouble we've seen in the network since Friday morning. Siting Tom Zander who says "It is now up to you which chain will gain the most traction." The article merely assumes or agrees that Mr. Zander is the central authority on bitcoin. Here is a target for our despise. Why should we whom love decentralization bow to the whims of Tom Zander?
I must admit that I am writing this in response to both the stupidity of these so called developers (profiteers) such as Gavin Andresen and the mass stupidity of traders looking to game their system. Traders, including myself, are adding to the problems of the network, but clowns like Andresen and Zander are throwing gasoline on the fire. In the wake of the failed 2X takeover, these clowns have exposed a serious flaw in bitcoin, that is, the myth that it functions independent of a committee or any centralized rule. This is a myth because goof ball developers who are themselves benefactors of the forks can send few tweets and cause a mass panic, while the rest of us mere users are forced to wait it out in stress and anticipation. I question the system as a whole.
If this post sounds slightly angry it's true. I am angry. Traders, believing they can cash in on the airdropped coins spawned from forking, are clogging up the network with deposits and withdrawals. This only justifies WHY dick holes like Andresen (and others) insist on their delusion that the bitcoin network is too slow. This is no different that starting a fire in a mall then pointing to the doors jammed with escaping people and claiming "See the doors aren't large enough"... I'm sorry sir, but the doors ARE large enough for the standard traffic. Todays congested network is a result of panic sales and capital flight started by YOU, NOT inadequate network capacity.
This latest attack exposes the myth that BItcoin is decentralized. It's not, not as we all wish it to be, and while there isn't a single person we can sue or take to court over bitcoin. We CAN hold the developers personally accountable. Just as an individual can be held accountable for a riot, these individual developers who clearly have exaggerated power within the Bitcoin community should be held accountable for runs like this post 2X attack. Developers should publish their addresses so the rest of us can keep an eye on what is happening with the bitcoin owned by them. This should be an ethic of standards for the community. If the community sees a particular developer move funds from bitcoin into an alt coin, we'd know he's up to something and could plan accordingly. For example, IF we knew Andresen or others are going to move their funds, we could block up the network until the altcoin price is driven up so high, that by the time his transactions are complete, he's paying three or four times the price, as the rest of us are made to do. But then again, this is exactly why they don't tell us until their funds are already safely transferred. I don't know the answer to this nonsense, but endless fork-attacks are NOT helping anything. Perhaps the community should pull together a and write a formal cease and deist against these "developers" with the clear statement of financial harm they're causing to everyone in the bitcoin space.
As I write this I keep an eye on my wallet and seethe with anger at an unconfirmed transaction I sent last Friday morning with a miner fees of $35. I remember the days when miner fees were negligible and no transaction with such a fee would take no longer than thirty minutes. Right now, the transaction is a fifty-ish hours old AND still zero confirmations. Here I see the only real change the network should get is an ability to rescind unconfirmed transactions.
As of now, I have decided to leave the Bitcoin space for good. That is, as soon as my value has recovered from this pull back, I'm pulling out and moving to Litecoin. While I greatly dislike the over-influence of Charlie Lee, at least the Litecoin network actually functions after a little bad news. And As for the "store of value" component, Monero will now be my go to. Until then, HODL. My thanks go to Ver, and all the other saboteurs for solidifying my decision to abandon Bitcoin for more reasonable prospects in other cryptocurrencies. I will no longer defend or promote Bitcoin online or in public because I'm simply too tired of explaining and trying to justify forks to people.
END RANT.