Bitcoin Cash supporter and Bitcoin.com owner Roger Ver got heated in a recent interview as the discussion turned to the moniker “Bcash.”
The interview in question
Ver and other “big-blockers” consider this moniker to be an insult, of course, as it essentially strips Bitcoin Cash of its identity. Ver and co. maintain Bitcoin Cash to be the rightful legacy of Satoshi Nakamoto’s whitepaper, so the “Bitcoin” in Bitcoin Cash is beyond non-negotiable for them.
As you can imagine, then, some supporters of the incumbent BTC chain use “Bcash” to get under Bitcoin Cash supporters’ skin. And some exchanges, like Cryptopia, have decided to list BCH as Bcash.
What to make of all these name games?
Well, wherever you fall in the scaling debates, it should come as no surprise that the issue is straightforward.
Permission-less means BCH has a right to Bitcoin name as much as anyone
Behold, the battle of ideas.
Rick Falkvinge, the leader of the Swedish Pirate Party, calls himself the CEO of Bitcoin Cash in a tongue-in-cheek way. Why? To highlight that he didn’t need anyone’s permission to claim that title.
If this were the traditional, permissioned world of old, then Falkvinge naturally would’ve had to be appointed by a Board of Directors to reach an equivalent position. But this isn’t the world of old. This is the democratizing, open-source dynamic of the crypto and cypherpunk revolution at work.
Whether you love them, hate them, or feel neutral about them altogether doesn’t matter – Falkvinge, Roger Ver, Craig Wright, and Jihan Wu have the right to use the “Bitcoin” name in Bitcoin Cash because they don’t need anyone’s permission to do so.
There is always and will always be room for debate. The BCH team claims to foster the project that is the true heir to Satoshi Nakamoto’s “Bitcoin” vision. Again, whether this is right, wrong, or neither, it is fully within their right to attempt the claim.
Conversely, supporters of the incumbent Bitcoin chain have just the same right to challenge and debate BCHers. Is the routine toxicity between both sides regrettable? Absolutely. Will both on-chain and off-chain scaling solutions be needed? Surely. But for now it’s clear that the competitive, anarchic nature of the Bitcoin community has made most salvos fair game.
As we all know from the feudal wars of yesteryear (and from watching Game of Thrones, of course), a claim is enough for a title.
Because what is Bitcoin but the ways that people use it, whatever ways those are? Just as with anything in life, Bitcoin will mean different things to different people, different communities. And as the space is premature and permission-less, the contest of ideas is only beginning.
Charlie Lee, the Litecoin founder, implements compatible Bitcoin updates onto Litecoin – he doesn’t need permission. Vitalik Buterin didn’t need permission to begin working on Ethereum.
To this extent, this permission-less atmosphere should make us all better through competition. Disagree vehemently with “big-blocker” BCH supporters? Get involved with Bitcoin Core. Feel the opposite? Help out BCH’s dev team at Bitcoin ABC.
You have the freedom to choose, to fight for excellence and supremacy. And that’s the magic of it all, right?
Featured Image via Fotolia