In a recent online discussion hosted on the 8btc forum, Dr. Liu Changyong—a prominent Chinese economist and PhD graduate from Peking University—shared his insights on the future of Bitcoin (BTC), Bitcoin Cash (BCH), and Ethereum (ETH). Known for his deep analysis of cryptocurrency economics since 2013, Liu has emerged as a leading voice in the blockchain community, particularly in support of Bitcoin Cash. His participation in a high-profile Ask Me Anything (AMA) session alongside figures like Jack Liao (creator of Bitcoin Gold) and Jiang Zhuoer (BTC.TOP) sparked widespread interest in the ideological and technical differences between major cryptocurrencies.
This article explores Liu’s key arguments, addressing critical topics such as hard forks, decentralization, scalability, and the long-term vision for digital currencies.
Hard Forks: Are They a Threat or a Feature?
One of the most debated topics during the AMA was whether hard forks pose a danger to blockchain networks.
Q: Isn’t there a valid reason Core developers resist increasing Bitcoin’s 1MB block size? Scaling isn’t as simple as big blockers claim.
Liu Changyong: I’m fully committed to Bitcoin Cash. And with all due respect, your skepticism reflects Core’s narrative. The successful creation of BCH proved that hard forks aren’t inherently dangerous. In fact, they’re a necessary mechanism for innovation and user-driven evolution. The idea that hard forks are catastrophic has been used to suppress debate—this is misinformation.
👉 Discover how blockchain upgrades can create new opportunities for users and investors.
He emphasized that network security and miner incentives remain intact post-fork, especially when community consensus supports the change. The survival of BCH after its 2017 split from BTC demonstrates resilience, not fragmentation.
Another participant asked whether miners with both hashing power and code influence could exploit systems for profit.
Liu responded that while centralization concerns exist, large mining entities like Bitmain have strong incentives to preserve network integrity. He credited Bitmain’s support as crucial during pivotal moments—especially when the Segwit2x initiative collapsed. He also highlighted collaborative development across teams including Bitcoin ABC, XT, BU, and RSK, showing that BCH isn’t controlled by a single group.
Ethical Implications of Forks and Difficulty Adjustment
The discussion turned to ethical concerns surrounding “forked coins” like Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin Diamond.
Q: With so many forks emerging, has BCH opened Pandora’s Box?
Liu Changyong: Forking is a fundamental right in open-source ecosystems. Anyone can create their own version of Bitcoin. However, projects without real user demand will naturally fail. What’s unethical is pre-mining—creating coins before public launch for private gain. That violates trust.
Jack Liao challenged this stance, questioning the ethics of BCH’s original Emergency Difficulty Adjustment (EDA) mechanism.
Jack Liao: If pre-mining is wrong, isn’t EDA—designed to let Bitmain dominate mining—also unethical?
Liu acknowledged the EDA's flaws: it allowed rapid hash rate swings as miners chased profitability between BTC and BCH. But he denied malicious intent, explaining that pools like BTC.top and ViaBTC acted to stabilize the network despite personal cost.
“The EDA was a temporary fix with unintended consequences. But it wasn’t a conspiracy.”
To resolve instability, the November 13 hard fork introduced a more balanced difficulty adjustment algorithm. Blocks now appear at more consistent intervals (10–20 minutes), improving predictability and network health.
Why Bitcoin Cash Over Bitcoin Unlimited?
Critics argue that Liu and other big-block advocates lack consistency—switching from Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) to Segwit2x, then finally backing BCH.
Q: You supported BU, then Segwit2x, now BCH. Where are your principles?
Liu Changyong: My loyalty isn’t to people or factions—it’s to logic. In 2016, I supported Core and opposed Craig Wright and Chinese miners. But after deep research, I realized Core’s roadmap leads to a permissioned settlement layer dominated by institutions—not a peer-to-peer electronic cash system as Satoshi envisioned.
Bitcoin Cash, by contrast, listens to users. It prioritizes low fees, fast transactions, and global usability. There’s no rigid roadmap—only market responsiveness.
“BCH is a market-driven currency. BTC has become an elite-controlled asset shaped by Core developers.”
He dismissed claims of price manipulation, attributing volatility to low awareness and early-stage adoption—similar to BTC in 2011–2014. As real-world use grows, he expects stability to follow.
Is Bitcoin Cash the Real Bitcoin?
A pivotal moment came when Jiang Zhuoer declared:
“BCH is the true Bitcoin—it follows Satoshi’s original whitepaper.”
Liu agreed in principle: from day one, he believed BCH better fulfilled Bitcoin’s promise. Initially, the community saw it as a backup plan if Bitcoin Core failed. But with growing exchange listings, wallet support, and merchant adoption, confidence has surged.
Q: Even if BTC declines, can BCH carry the torch?
Liu Changyong: Early Bitcoin thrived on faith. Today, BCH thrives on utility.
“Bitcoin Cash now relies on market demand—not belief.”
Regarding governance, Liu admitted some tension within developer groups—such as when Bitcoin ABC’s upgrade proposal overshadowed others—but stressed that the community is actively working toward more inclusive decision-making processes.
👉 Learn how decentralized networks evolve through community consensus and innovation.
Could Ethereum Challenge BCH?
With smart contract platforms rising, many wonder about Ethereum’s role.
Q: Should BCH integrate RSK for smart contracts?
Liu Changyong: The community welcomes innovations like RSK. While technical details vary, BCH’s larger block size allows room for advanced features without compromising core functionality.
On Ethereum’s centralization risks:
“Vitalik holds significant influence over ETH hard forks and consensus changes. That efficiency comes at a cost—enterprises hesitate to rely on a platform so dependent on one individual.”
Unlike ETH’s flexible model geared toward dApps, BCH focuses on being sound money: fixed supply, secure, and usable for everyday payments. Their goals differ; neither will “surpass” the other universally—they serve different markets.
Impact of Institutional Adoption
The planned launch of Bitcoin futures by CME Group raised concerns about market manipulation.
Q: Won’t institutional capital flood into BTC once futures go live?
Liu Changyong: Yes, positive news boosts BTC prices temporarily. But beware: futures enable shorting. When whales dump after pumping, retail investors suffer.
This underscores a key difference: while BTC attracts speculative investment, BCH aims for organic growth through real usage.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Why does Liu support BCH over BTC?
A: He believes BTC’s small block size limits its use as digital cash, turning it into a store of value dominated by elites. BCH’s larger blocks enable faster, cheaper transactions for everyday use.
Q: Is mining centralization a threat to BCH?
A: While concentration exists, major miners benefit from network stability. Liu argues economic incentives align better than ideological control in Core’s model.
Q: Can hard forks be ethical?
A: Yes—if done transparently and without pre-mining. User adoption determines success; artificial pumps fail over time.
Q: Does BCH have smart contract capabilities?
A: Not natively yet, but integrations like RSK are welcomed. Development focuses on balancing innovation with security and scalability.
Q: Will BTC scaling threaten BCH?
A: Unlikely. Core has consistently opposed on-chain scaling. A sudden shift would contradict years of messaging and technical design.
Q: How does BCH handle governance disputes?
A: Through open dialogue among developers and miners. While not perfect, the community is committed to avoiding centralized control.
👉 Stay ahead of market shifts with real-time data and secure trading tools.
Core Keywords:
Bitcoin Cash (BCH), Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), hard fork, blockchain scalability, cryptocurrency adoption, decentralized governance, digital currency
This analysis synthesizes economic reasoning with technical insight, offering a clear perspective on the future of decentralized money—one shaped not by ideology alone, but by user needs and market reality.