The Background of BCH Fork
1. A Recap of Past Forks
BCH is no stranger to forks, having originated from a BTC fork in 2017 due to Bitcoin's 1MB block size limitation. This led to the creation of BCH with an 8MB block size. In 2018, another hard fork split BCH into BCHABC (retaining the BCH name) and BCHSV (BSV) due to community disagreements over protocol restoration.
The current fork stems from the BCH Infrastructure Funding Plan (IFP), proposed on January 22, which suggested diverting 8% of block rewards to developers. This强制性donation sparked backlash, leading Bitcoin Node to develop an IFP-free alternative. Consequently, BCH faces another hard fork post-block 1605441600.
2. Community Reaction to IFP
The debate centers not on whether developers deserve rewards but on the强制nature of the IFP. Key figures like Roger Ver criticized it as "Soviet-style central planning," galvanizing widespread opposition.
- Developer Teams: Bitcoin Node, Bitcoin Unlimited, and others reject IFP.
- Business Entities: Electron Cash, Bitcoin.com, and SLP Foundation oppose ABC’s plan.
- Miners/Nodes: Over 75% of nodes support BCHN (IFP-free), with only 1.1% backing ABC.
- Market Sentiment: Futures show BCHN priced at 0.913× BCH, while BCHA lags at 0.073×.
Analyzing BCH Fork Through Historical Trends
1. Economic Theory: Miner Roles and Equilibrium
Rational Miners prioritize profit, switching chains based on:
- Coin Price: Higher value = higher revenue.
- Mining Difficulty: Inversely impacts收益.
Under equilibrium, dual-chain挖矿收益converges due to算力adjustments.忠诚Miners (e.g., dev teams) sustain weaker chains但are少数.
Short-Term Effects:
- 囤币demand may temporarily raise BCH’s price.
- Post-fork,算力shifts dynamically between chains.
2. Lessons from Past Forks
- Revenue Convergence: BTC/BCH and BCH/BSV挖矿收益eventually equalized.
- 算力Fluctuations: Early stages see volatile算力distribution.
- Loyalty Myth: Actual忠诚miners are fewer than perceived (e.g., BCH’s 2017 struggle with仅5 miners).
- Tech Matters: BCH’s 2018 recovery relied on升级like DAA. ABC’s technical edge may sustain BCHA despite IFP backlash.
Will Dual Chains Coexist or Will BCHA Fade?
Market futures suggest BCHA may struggle, but忠诚miners and potential upgrades could prolong its viability. For BCHN, maintaining矿工support hinges on sustaining币价and挖矿收益.
Key Takeaways:
- Core Conflict: IFP’s强制donation model alienated矿工and devs.
- Miner Behavior: Most are理性,随时switch chains for profit.
- Tech Edge: ABC’s开发strength could bolster BCHA long-term.
- Investor Caution: 囤币pre-fork carries risks (e.g., post-fork price drops).
FAQ Section
Q1: What triggered the BCH fork?
A: The IFP proposal to redirect 8% of block rewards to developers, deemed强制by the community.
Q2: Which chain has more support?
A: BCHN leads with >75%节点support, while ABC retains少数忠诚miners.
Q3: How do miners choose between chains?
A: 理性miners opt for higher-revenue chains;忠诚miners stick to preferred链despite收益.
Q4: Will both chains survive long-term?
A: BCHA’s future depends on upgrades to attract算力; BCHN must sustain矿工incentives.
Q5: Is pre-fork囤币advisable?
A: Historically risky—post-fork币价often drops below pre-fork levels.
👉 Explore crypto trends for deeper insights.