Unfortunately, I did not see your original post till now: https://voat.co/v/SporeStack/2061120
Question for /u/Terannotterran I am curious about your thoughts on Bitcoin Cash. Are you holding long term? Have you investigated the possibility of BCC becoming the more profitable chain for miners, thus leading to a 'death spiral' for the original/segwit chain? Do you think larger block sizes are closer to Satoshi's original vision of bitcoin contrasted against segwit and settlement layers added on top of small blocks which might lead to centralized liquidity providers?
I have tried to hold as much a I can, however have had to tap into holdings often given expenses and life choices. But, BCH is still my primary investment at this time.
I did not investigate BCH and BTC using the same hashing algorithm, thus being competitive to the miners in that regard. However, that clearly is the case. As BCH goes up in value miners switch over, transactions stack up in BTC because of the lack of blocks, and then they jump over when fees are high enough or difficulty drops. BCH is much more resilient given the emergency difficulty adjustment which seems to be working fairly well.
I don't know exactly what Satoshi had in mind but it's my belief that he would have raised the block size long ago. I think it's clear that running full nodes is already cumbersome. It will still be cumbersome on BCH and probably more so in the future. I can see a market for a coin that is specifically meant for the limitations of modern hardware, but don't see the point all that much. We usually use SPV nodes or third parties anyways, even with BTC.
I think settlement layers can be huge benefits, even to anonymity. But even as a settlement layer BTC is cutting it much too short. I think the currency has to be relatively self-sustaining before it can be considered such. I think LN has a lot of potential but it's unfortunate as the developers really taint it by holding back BTC, even if LN is a good solution to many problems.
Right now, I think BTC should be dead (or maybe stick around at $2,000 as a legacy settlement layer). Would rather use LTC if I want segwit and faster confirmation times. LN is already live (at least somewhat?) on LTC.
I think some settlement layers can be centralized, others decentralized. I think LN works a lot like proof of stake and it's possible that it will actually be quite decentralized and have a very competitive clearing house network that can help all chains scale.
I also think there are some illusions, that LN is "easy" or that segwit was going to fix everything right away. They are very complex and take a lot of time to roll out. I've seen some of the code required to convert an existing Bitcoin codebase to one that can process segwit and it is not simple at all. Even 2MiB blocks would've been a better move in my opinion.
I saw the writing on the wall and started work towards accepting BCH maybe three months ago. Took me quite a while, tried many libraries, eventually had to move to Python 3 and fork bit for bitcash. Then around Bitcoin's $19,000 price I realized that was the point to bail out of BTC and so I did. Turns out that fees have only gone worse since then, BTC dropped, and BCH doubled (at one point quadrupled).
I wish I could've answered this sooner but I made a somewhat related post about BTC/BCH before the Bitpay/Coinbase announcements. https://voat.co/v/bitcoin/2286756
Anyway, and SporeStack has switched over to BCH. I'll probably drop BTC soon or add a huge price floor. I'd consider keeping BTC support if I can programatically accomodate for how expensive it is to accept (would need to calculate price floor based on bitcoin fee rates to make sure I only take inputs that can be spent).
Thanks for your questions. I'm sorry that I didn't get back to you sooner.