It has been only a few years since BTC has received any real significant attention from institutional investors and the mainstream public. This year, we have seen the first 'forks' of BTC in the form of BCC and Bitcoin Gold. This month brings another highly anticipated fork, the Segwit 2x BTC but the question looms, how successful will this fork truly be?

I recently read an article from CoinDesk entitled 'Split or No Split? Bitcoin Miners See No Certainty in Segwit2x Fork' which shed a bit of light on this question.

Haipo Yang, CEO of ViaBTC, the fourth largest pool by mining power, agreed, indicating that his pool will only offer bitcoin mining on the original bitcoin chain to begin.

"We have not received user request to run 2x. If 2x survives and the users request it, we will support both. Let the users have a choice," he told CoinDesk via WeChat.

If Zhuoer and Yang's statements are any indication, then, it might not be best to view the proposed figures for how much hashing power will support Segwit2x as set in stone.

So it seems there is certainty behind the fact that BTC will undergo another split and a new, faster blockchin will be created (segwit2x). Its also clear that people will receive these new digital tokens for free at a 1 to 1 ratio based on the number of traditional BTC coins they are holding. But without adoption of both miners and users, the value of these new coins will be dubious at best.

There is also a lot of controversy around the new Segwit 2x implementation.

Jan Capek, CEO of the fifth largest mining pool Slush Pool, said he'll be aligning behind Bitcoin Core developers in their rejection of the Segwit2x software. In his view, the introduction of the Segwit2x software will definitely "lead to the creation of two bitcoins" – one of which runs on a blockchain with bitcoin's current rules, and the other which features the rules proposed by Segwit2x supporters.

The bigger question seems to be which Bitcoin will be 'the Bitcoin, the traditional chain or this new advanced chain following an expanded rule set and backed by large institutional investors.

Still, the wild card appears to be whether bitcoin cash has effectively shifted perception, as the blockchain boasts an 8 MB block size, considerably higher than the 2 MB block size Segwit2x will introduce.

This is an interesting point to make about the two existing 'Bitcoins' that really focuses on the technology behind it. Is block size superiority alone enough to move a market from one 'Bitcoin' to another?

Finally I'd like to finish by thoughts by examining the following statement:

Evoking the grand terms that sometimes best befit bitcoin power games, Steven Mosher, head of sales and marketing at mining chip maker Canaan, believes that, in the long-term, miners will support Segwit2x as a way to boost investment in bitcoin cash. Indeed, Mosher, whose company sells chips to miners big and small, said his customers largely have a preference for bitcoin cash, and he noted he sees them participating in the build-up of what he called a "long-term infrastructure play."

If we view all these competing bitcoins like a horse race it may seem there will be only one true winner but there's also value in coming in second or third place. If you think the value behind Bitcoin is in the hardware and the miner's then putting some money into BCC seems to be a winning play. If you feel Wall Street will take over the show then Segwit 2x is your best bet. If you like the decentralized nature and solid track record of the original and only true BTC then stick with it. I've always been told many eggs in many baskets brings wins more often then not. You cant go wrong grabbing a few of each!

Source:

Split or No Split? Bitcoin Miners See No Certainty in Segwit2x Fork - CoinDesk