Skip to main content

Why does BCH already have what BTC wants?

BTC wants and BCH has

Sucks to suck.

As time passes since the split in 2017, BCH & BTC become increasingly different.

However, having a common origin & technological underpinning, many good ideas for upgrades are shared between the BTC & BCH community via convergent evolution or cross referencing. Since BTC is hijacked & full of propaganda (among other problems), they have fallen behind more than a decade of mutually desired protocol upgrades, tooling, conferences & more - which the BCH community simply shipped to production while the BTC community dithered (or: were gaslit & delayed by their hijackers and cope).

BCH has, BTC wants​

The BCH Podcast maintains a complete evolving list of these items with examples of the BTC community requesting them here. Naming conventions differ, significantly similar ideas are annotated as necessary. As of April 2025, the list is:

  • ✅ Transaction Introspection (BTC: "CTV - Check Template Verify", lesser version of the same concept).
  • ✅ ABLA. Some members of the BTC community make doomed requests for increased blocksizes.
  • ✅ OP_CAT.
  • ✅ VM Limits (BTC: "Great Script Restoration", lesser version of the same concept).
  • ✅ 64 bit integers & Big Int Maths (BCH shipped the latter as part of Velma).
  • ✅ Advanced code tooling (BCH has CashScript, BitAuthIDE & more that far outstrip BTC alternatives - since the BCH community has the far improved technology to need it).
  • ✅ Conferences discussing big block scaling (eg. a BTC conference like OP_NEXT is just a very outdated version of BCH BLISS, as satirised here).
  • ✅ Fixes to time warp bug, quadratic hashing issue & 64 byte transactions (BTC: "Great Consensus Cleanup", BCH is not affected by the timewarp bug due to its upgraded difficulty adjustment algorithm & shipped fixes to the others years prior).
  • ✅ State-carrying UTXOs (proposed in BTC as an OP_Code, added by BCH in 2023 with the superior design of CashTokens)
  • ✅ Increases to the size of OP_RETURNs & allowing multiple OP_RETURNs per transaction. BCH did exactly that in 2018 & 2021 respectively, because they're just good ideas - although the idea was only generated within the BTC camp as one possible band-aid solution to their self-inflicted Inscriptions mess.

Due to their vindictive pride or ignorance in censorship, the BTC community remain partially (and often deliberately) unaware of their accelerating inferiority. Whenever they DO come to finally encounter the disparity, their attempts at rationalising & debating it are often incredibly comedic insights into human psychology. See this classic example from The Podcast where BTC guys try to reason out how the BCH community has presciently frontrun them technologically (despite being in their view far stupider):

See also: What's wrong with Bitcoin BTC?