The dispute over which fork is the original Bitcoin fork is now going on since a year. Bitcoin Cash forked on the 1st of August 2017. Since that time, the two camps are fighting over the claim of which fork is the legitimate and original Bitcoin fork. Both sides are constantly straw manning the arguments of the other side and many people estimate this dispute to be harmful to Bitcoin and the adoption of cryptocurrencies in general. There are many allegations between the two camps. Each side accuses the other of holding up the development and the adoption of Bitcoin. But here are some reasons why this dispute is actually beneficial for crypto.
Bitcoin was always inevitably changing from the Bitcoin of 2009
Much has changed since the very early years of Bitcoin. It was a cryptocurrency that was mainly used and discussed by people who are either very skeptical of the state or who were massive computer geeks. A good portion of the early supporters shared both of these qualities. Those people started mining Bitcoin out of curiosity with their ordinary PCs and Laptops. Noone had any clue about the value of Bitcoin which is why the cost for the first Pizza bought with Bitcoin was 10,000 BTC. If Bitcoin was to be adopted as a global currency it is clear that Bitcoin could and will continue to not be the same.
Mining power moved mostly away from private PCs and Laptops to data centers. Just as the blockchain which can still be stored on your private pc in its complete form (173GB). But the time will come where the Blockchain will be stored in data centers as well. As of now, it seems that the scaling debate and actual changes to the code might never end. The argument over which Bitcoin fork is the real Bitcoin from 2009 is pointless. Bitcoin was always destined to change.
Competition is good for business
Most people who are active in the Bitcoin space share libertarian views. Therefore, they know that competition is good for business. What we currently witness as the rivalry between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash and currently even within Bitcoin Cash between the different development teams is exemplary for this view. Only the realization of ideas and their competition allows an objective comparison and evaluation of our new technology. The difference between BTC and BCH is a fundamental one and its good to research both of them. It might be true that on-chain scaling will encounter problems in the future. But it also might be true that off-chain scaling is less useful than we thought. The rivalry between the Bitcoin forks leads to a lot of unnecessary verbal confrontation like insults, misinformation and the spreading of rumors. But it is still much better than the alternative.
No central bank that decides our monetary policy
Let’s imagine that Bitcoin would not have evolved the way that it did from 2009 on. Let’s suppose that the international state community would have forbidden the technology and would have claimed it for itself. Instead of, thousands of development teams competing with each other. We would have states that design cryptocurrencies according to their own needs. No matter what they would decide, we would have a one-size-fits-all solution in crypto. Possibly just a nice experiment with no real use-case and no value. With neglectable development. Just how Fiat money pretends to be a one-size-fits-all solution. But in reality it serves a few much better than most of us.