The entire point of the Segwit2x compromise was just that: A compromise. Barry Silbert sought to bring two sides of the fence together, to find a resolution to the Bitcoin scaling debate, by finding a way to incorporate both Segregated Witness and a very mild blocksize increase to an effective 2MB.

Except following the Bitcoin-Cash (BCC,BCH) hardfork, we have both sides of the fence now clearly represented. The 2x hardfork has therefore, paradoxically, already happened. Albeit, an even larger blocksize.

But the fundamental points of disagreement between the two camps are philosophical. One believes in a restricted blocksize, and one does not. Segwit2x is a restricted blocksize. Segwit2x simply delays the inevitable, and kicks the can just that little bit further down the road. It does not address the fundamental problem.

See, nowhere in the NYA agreement did it state that Segwit2x will honor sequential blocksize increases going forward.

Many big blocker miners that signed up to this agreement were simply forced into the position with a big dose of ‘hope’. Hope that the doubled blocksize would demonstrate its practicality and efficiency, and hence pave the way for more big block hardforks.

When Distributed server processing system Ethereum and Distributed server processing system Ethereum Classic forked, there were clear philosophical differences which saw both forks survive and even thrive. Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash also hold philosophical and visionary differences. Segwit2x effectively holds the same philosophy as Bitcoin Core. That is, a limited blocksize. It changes nothing in the long term.

So the planned hardfork for Segwit2x will effectively lead to a scenario where we have three Bitcoin forks.

I’m going to collectively name these three forks as “Genesis Bitcoins” since they all share the same historical ledger, but diverge from the moment of forking. This is to clarify the differences between these Bitcoins and other altcoins that use the name Bitcoin, but are not of the same seed (ie. BitcoinDark).

Now potentially we have these three Genesis Bitcoins represented:

Bitcoin Cash Bitcoin Segwit2x Bitcoin Core

Under the current agreement, it’s highly likely that Bitcoin Core will then become the minority coin.

The problem we have now, with yet another fork of Bitcoin, is price dilution.

Not only will this chaos create more uncertainty, but the price will dilute. “But BitcoinCash didn’t dilute the price!” I hear you say. Correct. The introduction of Bitcoin Cash had a very interesting economic lesson for us all. It temporarily removed the uncertainty, and officially split two communities that were at each other’s necks. This alleviated much tension, and actually boosted confidence.

Splitting ideological differences can have economic gains. But splitting the same camp can have devastating consequences.

Certainly a house divided cannot stand.

I appeal to big blocker miners, to rethink the ideological position they have taken with B2x, and to support Satoshi’s Bitcoin Cash. The hardfork has already happened . . .

Eli Afram

@justicemate

New to Bitcoin? Check out CoinGeek’s Bitcoin for Beginners section, the ultimate resource guide to learn more about Bitcoin—as originally envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto—and blockchain.