6 months ago, a ""skeptic, not troll"" was "willing to bet" in 6 months the show would have stopped or Youtube subs declined. Of course, they didn't actually put any money on the line - lucky for them cos today they'd have to pay up. Haters gonna hate. reddit.com/r/btc/comments/vg…

Endgame: Bitcoin Cash can consistently match or outperform "privacy coins" and other use-case-specific networks in the long term – on both transaction sizes and overall user experience. xitter.cf/bitjson/status/1884995…

Resharing Q&A from a dev team: "what is the status of Bitcoin Cash in terms of Bitcoin Script and the latest Bitcoin soft forks? SegWit, Taproot?" Me: BCH is computationally equivalent to ETH now, but BCH has significantly higher compute limits and lower fees. As of May 2025, almost anything can be compiled or ported to CashVM, and by May 2026, CashVM will effectively be a high-level language: arbitrary precision math, loops, functions, etc. In general, you can do anything with ECDSA-like compute density (CPU-per-byte) up to 100KB of code/data (in standard transactions, 1MB nonstandard). Pay for a bigger transaction, get more compute. (Re 2026 upgrade: many BCH stakeholders have already published lock-in approval statements – one of the 4 CHIPs had some contention earlier, but the disputing stakeholders have now endorsed that CHIP too. At this point, probably only discovery of an unfixable flaw would delay any of the 2026 CHIPs. Note that Nov 15 is the lock-in date + "chipnet" 6-month-early network upgrade, so after Nov 15, we'll be certain about which CHIPs are going into the May 2026 BCH upgrade.) For a demo, here's the LM-OTS post-quantum signature scheme implemented precisely according to RFC 8554 (NIST adopted) in pure Bitcoin (Cash) Script: blog.bitjson.com/quantumroot…. It's >2x more byte efficient than the WASM equivalent (I'll share more comparing them later) And performance wise, this is an example that e.g. is not possible to build on Solana. I wrote a bit more about that here: bitcoincashresearch.org/t/ch…, but TLDR: Solana's compute limits are too low per-byte + Solana's maximum transaction size is too small. BCH transaction validation is "embarrassingly parallel" to an absurd degree, so we were able to clean up the limits over the past few years to actually reduce the worst case validation performance from pre-2017 requirements (i.e. BTC nodes need higher specs than BCH nodes today) while expanding contract capabilities to ETH levels. BCH re-enabled many of the Satoshi opcodes + data signatures (from the stack) in 2018, a full set of introspection opcodes in 2022, native token primitives in 2023, and arbitrary precision math in 2025. The 2026 upgrade mainly improves code-factoring (trimming waste/duplication) vs. adding new capabilities. I picked that LM-OTS scheme as a technical demo since it hits several critical thresholds vs. ETH and SOL. On BCH, these Quantumroot transactions are actually faster-to-validate-per-byte than "payments only" Bitcoin Cash transactions have been since 2009 (and likewise vs. BTC transactions). Re screenshot: is an in-browser IDE (@BitauthIDE) I've built over the past few years. I'll be working a lot more on it this year (finally) now that CashVM is relatively feature complete – there's a lot more multi-transaction system design, invariant testing, constraint solving, symbolic execution, etc. capabilities I'd like to add. Re BCH opcodes: not sure if there are any websites with pretty tables (maybe I should build one), but here's a full listing with descriptions I wrote – today's opcodes (last addition 2023): github.com/bitauth/libauth/b… and the 2026 additions (loops, functions, and some additional bitwise ops): github.com/bitauth/libauth/b… Re language: Bitauth IDE includes a very basic language and compiler I call "CashAssembly" that compiles to CashVM bytecode – it's just a way of writing raw data and opcodes with some basic variable support and other features. It's essentially what you see on the old Bitcoin wiki, but with some lossiness cleaned up. The BCH space has other high-level languages too – CashScript is a JS-like stack (loops pending: github.com/CashScript/cashsc…) and AlbaDsl is a really promising Haskell DSL. Remember though that Satoshi based the Bitcoin Script language on Forth (a high-level language of its own) – it's honestly great for building substantial applications from many small modules. For heavy applications like ZK proof verification, it's hard to beat the low-level control of CashAssembly right now. I made lots of performance improvements to Bitauth IDE while working on Quantumroot, and I'll be happy to help fix any perf issues as your application grows. Bitauth IDE has lots of built-in testing capabilities too, so I'm happy to help you set up "tested scripts" with scenarios and such. I wrote more about testing CashAssembly here recently: t.me/bitauth_ide/1627

@coinexcom cancelled my withdrawal after 3 hours stating "bch wallet synchronization issues". Weird that I can withdraw 1/5th the amount just fine.