Calvin Ayre has called off the hash war. CoinGeek, the mining pool and news outlet Ayre finances, announced this week that Bitcoin SV would stop competing for the Bitcoin Cash ticker. They are moving
Calvin Ayre has called off the hash war. CoinGeek, the mining pool and news outlet Ayre finances, announced this week that Bitcoin SV would stop competing for the Bitcoin Cash ticker. They are moving to the BSV label instead. A press release titled "Original Bitcoin is Reborn with Bitcoin SV (BSV); BCH Hash War Ends" carried Ayre's statement.
In it, Ayre said: "After Bitcoin Core became SegWit coin last year, our mission has always been to make sure the original Bitcoin survives and succeeds. With its series of radical and unilateral code changes in just the last week, ABC's BCH has departed so far from the original Bitcoin that it is now an alt-coin developer experiment and we no longer have any interest in it or its tarnished brand. Bitcoin SV fought to preserve the Satoshi Vision, and is the original Bitcoin. We will now focus entirely on building upon an already vibrant Bitcoin SV ecosystem. Although ABC may keep the damaged BCH ticker symbol, BSV is winning over BCH's native application ecosystem in droves. We look forward to out-competing BCH (and BTC) in the marketplace, rather than in further chain battles."
Two months back, Ayre had promised something else. A CoinGeek post under his name from September 10 read: "Additionally, we will fight any attempts by anyone else to cause a chain split. CoinGeek and friends believe in the Satoshi Vision for the evolution of Bitcoin and that means all disputes should be settled by Nakamoto consensus and Miner hash elections. Nakamoto consensus dictates that at all times the longest chain (with the most Proof of Work) shall prevail and this will be respected at all times by CoinGeek Media and Mining."
CoinGeek's mining pool did not follow this standard. When the longest chain with the most proof of work turned out to be Bitcoin Cash (ABC), they stayed on SV. Ayre blamed rented hash rather than owned hash from his opponents. The Satoshi white paper draws no distinction between the two.
Roger Ver and Jihan Wu had sufficient mining reserves to counter anything Wright attempted. They also flipped one of Wright's own tactics on him. "Satoshi's Shotgun," the operation Wright had promoted for months, ended up slowing SV while leaving ABC alone.
Before the war began, Wright said it would not occur. A few days in, SV briefly led ABC in proof of work. Wright claimed victory. The lead disappeared and SV never recovered.
The exchanges settled it. Nearly every major platform gave the BCH ticker to ABC. Only platforms already committed to Ayre and Wright chose SV. The contest was over before it ended.
Bitcoin Cash stood at $7.558 billion on November 14. By November 26, ABC was valued at $3.054 billion and SV at $1.923 billion. Together they were worth $4.978 billion. The loss amounted to $2.581 billion from the pre-fork level, a 34 percent decline. Holders watched billions evaporate across two chains.
SV gained value the day after the announcement. The end of the expensive hash war and certainty on ticker assignments created stability. But the math was harsh for anyone who had split their coins before the fork. Bitcoin Cash traded at $175.31 on November 27 and Bitcoin SV at $97.20. Combined, that was $272.51 per unit. Before the fork, Bitcoin Cash sold for $432.97. Those who split lost $160.46 per unit, or around 37 percent.
Mainstream media did not treat the SV hash war as it had the original Bitcoin versus Bitcoin Cash dispute. CNBC, which had regularly called on Roger Ver for Bitcoin Cash commentary, barely mentioned SV. The press does not devote effort to covering a $3 billion asset fighting a $2 billion asset when Bitcoin itself trades near $65 billion. Before the fork, when Bitcoin Cash held $7 billion and positive momentum, the story carried more weight. That moment passed.
This debate has ended. Holders can argue that Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SV adheres more closely to the Satoshi Nakamoto white paper. That argument does not make either chain Bitcoin. Nakamoto never completed the protocol. He did not release version 1.0 because the work was unfinished. Disagreement with Bitcoin Core's path is defensible. Disagreement does not transform another chain into Bitcoin. Craig Wright lost, and this argument with it.
