Bisq will not list BCC (Bitcoin Cash/BitMainCoin/Bitcoin ABC)

With 1st of August a hard fork of Bitcoin will be released - Bitcoin Cash.

There is written already a lot about it so we refer to some of those articles [1], [2] for those who are not familiar with the matter.

TL;DR:

  • Bisq will not add BCC as altcoin.
  • If you want to move your Bitcoins from your Bisq wallet to a BCC wallet you can view all the private keys of the wallet by opening the wallet details popup with alt+j. If you have a BCC wallet which supports BIP 44 you can use the seed words for importing, otherwise you need to import the private keys.

Why we decided to not list BCC as altcoin?
We have initially considered to add BCC as altcoin but we decided not to do it for various reasons.

As posted [3] a few days ago there are a few major concerns with BCC:

  • Risk for users privacy and lowering Bitcoins fungibility by a large-scale coin merge in case many Bitcoin users would engage in BCC exchange (moving and merging previously not connected funds).
  • Setting a precedence for that model to fork off the Bitcoin network with an Altcoin (do we want to see that every month now?)
  • Lack of trust in their technically ability to provide a secure replay protection

Beside that they acted highly unprofessional in several areas:

  • They used the PoS of Bitstamp and have forgotten to change the name Bitstamp in the text. How hard is it to do a find&replace?
  • The BCC ticker symbol is already taken by Bitconnect [4] as well by a future on Bitfinex for Bitcoin Core. How hard is it to do that basic search for existing ticker symbols?

We also consider their activities unethical:

  • They engaged in trade mark infringement by using the Electrum Logo and make people think Electrum is supporting BCC.
  • They use the brand “Bitcoin” in their name “Bitcoin Cash” which might provoke confusion for users who are not so familiar with the recent activities. We see that as an attempt of hijacking an established brand.

Furthermore we have basic requirements for adding an altcoin and those have not been fulfilled:

  • The Coin operators need to make the request
  • They have to provide a pull request for the address validation
  • and more…

Finally it would take precious time to test a new release and do the deployment. Time we consider better invested in other work.

[1] https://medium.com/@jimmysong/bitcoin-cash-what-you-need-to-know-c25df28995cf
[2] https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/future-bitcoin-cash-interview-bitcoin-abc-lead-developer-amaury-séchet/
[3] https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6p5439/bitcoincash_and_chain_analysis/

4 Likes

I don’t think there is any shame in saying that the project simply doesn’t want to support it for moral and/or political reasons, as it believes that it will hurt Bitcoin in the long run and therefor the project itself. If in the future project decides differently, then ok, but for now this is simply the case and will stay this way until further notice. It is only important to note that it is nothing directly personal, it isn’t some kind of revenge or personal benefits at play here at the cost of the project. It is simply project protecting itself the best it knows how.

2 Likes

Just another input giving evidence of BCC’s either severe incompetence or severe malevolence:

See also:

Grate!
I am absolutely agree!

1 Like

ManfredKarrer, you are getting your info only from a censored resources and trolls on twitter, this by thinking that you are in good faith.
Otherwise you are just a liar/troll as many others.

Lack of trust in their technically ability to provide a secure replay protection

Did you see this? https://www.bitcoincash.org/replay
This from the v0.14.5, released 3 days ago.
https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc/blob/a46e63c2bb3d189beb846a8d34a0d33fd563fa7b/doc/release-notes/release-notes-0.14.5.md

They used the PoS of Bitstamp and have forgotten to change the name Bitstamp in the text. How hard is it to do a find&replace?

They? You are talking about Viabtc. So what’s the problem of Bitcoinabc?

The BCC ticker symbol is already taken by Bitconnect [4] as well by a future on Bitfinex for Bitcoin Core. How hard is it to do that basic search for existing ticker symbols?

Again, you are talking about Viabtc. The team behind Bitcoinabc hasn’t forced neither proposed any ticker symbols to anyone.

  • They engaged in trade mark infringement by using the Electrum Logo and make people think Electrum is supporting BCC.

The team behind Electrum Cash (now Electron Cash) has been in contact with with Thomas Voegtlin all the past days to fix with this problem, and it seems that they arrived to agreement.

  • They use the brand “Bitcoin” in their name “Bitcoin Cash” which might provoke confusion for users who are not so familiar with the recent activities. We see that as an attempt of hijacking an established brand."

Welcome to the hard forks.

On Milan you said to me that you were get up in the morning and that you weren’t finding any censorship on r/bitcoin and anywhere else.
You should see that this is a completely broken logic in a situation with censorship.
I think that you are very naive.

You should really stop living in your closed box.

The reason that I don’t want to participate on your DAO thing it is that you are completely broken, other then all the things that you are writing everywhere that are completely against the idea of Bitcoin and being against censorship, I’m starting thinking that you are really acting in bad faith, because it seems too stupid to me.

1 Like

Sorry to hear your response. I respect you a lot for your early and strong support for Bisq. Would have loved to see you as DAO genesis receiver. The block size civil war has created quite a lot of damage…

5 Likes

I have to give it to @HostFat here… I am a SegWit supporter. I think Bitcoin Cash is a distraction, and that it is being launched solely to protect the interests of BitMain. In some peoples’ view, that makes me brainwashed. For others, I am a beacon of reason. Regardless, however, I would have expected a more apolitical resolution to whether Bitcoin Cash should be listed on bisq. From the get-go, BitSquare/bisq has listed every altcoin, no questions-asked, as long as a few requirements were met. Several of the altcoins already available on bisq have shady origins (premines, useless clones of other projects etc). Therefore, it appears that Bitcoin Cash has been singled out for a political reason. I think this is unfortunate in the case of bisq (unlike a privately held exchange), as it is all about decentralization and, soon, decentralized governance.

I think that Bitcoin Cash should be given the same opportunity to be listed on bisq as any other altcoin. I understand it is convenient to use bisq as a vehicle for promulgating a certain view, but in this case it actually hurts bisq as it implies that, despite claims of “decentralization”, bisq is top-down controlled by a few individuals. I know of course this is the case anyhow, until the DAO is successfully launched. Still, it sends the wrong signal to existing and future bisq users.

@HostFat Instead of rejecting the DAO, consider it instead as your chance or “voting” for Bitcoin Cash inclusion on bisq in the future, even if @ManfredKarrer does everything in his power to block it.

1 Like

I am sure that time will tell. Maybe it turns out to have a decent replay protection and our first and only developer has a change of hearth. But Bitcoin Cash might also just flop as a crytpocurrency in a first week and no one uses it. Who knows, we shall see what the future holds…

1 Like

The requirements for all altcoins have not been met at all:

  • nobody requested to add it (not even “fans”)
  • nobody provided a PR for the address validation
  • conflicting ticker symbol

Once the DAO is in place with voting such decisions can and should be delegated to BSQ token holders. But so far that is not the case. There have been also no discussions here so there was no reason for me to assume that BCC/BCH/ABC has big support under Bisq users.

I have posted quite a bit of background why I consider them un-ethical and bad for Bitcoin. To add an altcoin which has IMO the goal to hurt Bitcoin is somehow counter-productive to Bisq as Bitcoin is the main base currency (so far LTC and DOGE got close zero interest and DASH a little bit but also not overwhelming).

I am also surprised and disappointed that so few people are not more critical with the privacy implications if a huge portion of Bitcoin holders would move their coins and merge them together to exchange them for a few bucks. Is it so easy to manipulate Bitcoiners with triggering their greed to get a few bucks and risk their own privacy as well as reduce the anonymity set of the whole Bitcoin ecosystem? That hurts the fungibility of Bitcoin and thus the value. Chain analysis companies will celebrate.
Bisq’s core value is protection of privacy. To support an altcoin which might cause considerable damage in that area, is for me a strong reason to not support it.

Sure you can see that as a kind of my personal opinion, but above are clearly stated requirements we have in place and those are not met at all. So my opinions don’t change the decision based on facts.

3 Likes

If the privacy argument is not clear here is more background info:

2 Likes

@ManfredKarrer you are an idealist in a cynical world.
After the initiation of DAO things might happen to Bisq that you won’t like. Try to prepare for that. “A few bucks” is a strong motivator.

For now most people just see financial opportunities in the crypto-world and deny any political extensions. People just want the bucks without the politics. Who cares if their privacy might be compromised by connecting two coins when at the same time they get a chance to double their wealth?

Try not to be disappointed by how things will evolve.

1 Like

sad to see how the conflict between Segwit (Blockstream) and Big Blocks (Satoshi’s idea) and all the corresponding fight between /r/Bitcoin and /r/btc found its way into this discussion.

Anyways - I just want to add that I am a absolute fan of big blocks and do not like Segwit very much because it is not a scaling solution and secondly it makes things very complex and difficult. (I mentioned that many times)

I am also a strong believer in this decentralized market place and will support it with or without immediate BitcoinCash integration. BCH is now the third biggest cryptocoin according to https://coinmarketcap.com/ (forget Ripple). And this fact alone will make it necessary to integrate it former or later. If I am right it will grow as big as Bitcoin/SW and will finally surpass it due to much better scalability features and a clear code without Segwit complexity. Have you seen that BCH incredibly has nearly the same hashrate as Bitcoin/SW ? Sadly Bisq missed the initial first mover opportunity to trade BCH at this time when many want to trade it but most markets are not ready now.

1 Like

fwiw, I strongly support Manfred’s reasoning. But I’m also pretty sure that we will see a lot of additional growing pains, because no one can appease everyone. While I’m 100% d’accord with his Bcash decision I will use all my voting power after the DAO goes live to undo the scammy Dash things going on here.

1 Like

@stabbochabbo another DASH hater? It would be good for everyone to go down to the facts instead of producing propaganda and spice it with their distracted emotions

Shame really. I liked Bisq. But if it won’t support Bitcoin Cash, it’s no use to me.

2 Likes

yeah I read that many times now - this is the forgiven opportunity to position Bisq in the market

  • I request it now (the faster the better because many want to trade it)
  • ?
  • Ticker consensus should be non conflicting “BCH”

that may be late
the initial statement on BCH was so negative that it was quite difficult to take a different opinion.

yeah that was the main point - but from an unbiased position it should be clear that Blockstream + Segwit + LN is the real problem. In the current situation it si not very clear if SW+LN or ABC becomes the real Bitcoin

chain analysis works very well on legacy Bitcoin - that well that it was possible to trace the stolen MtGOX funds and link them to BTC-e. It should be obvious to any Bitcoin user that he exposes himself to the world as soon as he spends his coins (if not even before)

sadly - Bisq is really giving up its biggest opportunity to penetrate the market quickly. Please think twice about it

2 Likes

Shame really. I liked Bisq. But if it won’t support Bitcoin Cash, it’s no use to me.

Well, I guess you could just go ahead and fork bisq to run on Bcash rather than Bitcoin if you really need it.

I am also surprised and disappointed that so few people are not more critical with the privacy implications if a huge portion of Bitcoin holders would move their coins and merge them together to exchange them for a few bucks.

Most people don’t care, and the few that care will know better and take their pre-cautions.

Compare also to the Stellar/Lumens air-drop which started on June 27th. It requires BTC holders to authenticate with their Facebook account to prevent/deter payouts to restricted countries. This is way worse that consolidating all your UTXOs in the case of BCC/BCH. Still, Stellar/Lumen is listed on bisq.

However one twists and turns this issue, the decision to not list BCC/BCH does not seem consistent with BitSquare/bisq’s past pattern of accepting all altcoins “no-questions-asked”.