BitcoinCash🟢Canada

🍻 Another merchant joins the Bitcoin Cash economy! Harbourfront Hotel in Townsville now accepts #BitcoinCash 💚 Real businesses. Real payments. Peer-to-peer electronic cash. Welcome to Bitcoin Cash City. 🌴⚡ #BCH #Townsville #BitcoinCashCity

🔥 #BCH meets #XMR, wtf?! Sent to one address, but a different address got the bitcoin-cash:native? Something is off here >> or is it just private? I think #Zcash just got serious competition. This tx is already post-quantum, verified on-chain. Let that sink in $ZEC.

⚡ It's live. You can now pay for electricity with Bitcoin Cash on PaySats. Buy your prepaid tokens straight from your BCH wallet. No signup, no KYC, non-custodial. Airtime, data and now electricity, all paid the BCH way. 👉 app.trypaysats.xyz #BitcoinCash #BCH

The BCH Bullet — Sunday 20th September 2026 Several stakeholders endorse 1-minute blocks, @_paytaca_ AI launches with BCH payments, @GuanacoFi DEX goes live on Bitcoin Cash, and more. thebchbullet.substack.com/p/…

The common belief: BTC and BCH are running the same governance model at different speeds. Both are decentralized, both upgrade through community consensus, BCH just happens to move faster. The timeline in the image shows why that framing doesn't hold. BCH shipped a coordinated protocol upgrade every May 15 from 2021 through 2026. Six in a row. BigBlockIfTrue in 2021 removed the 50-transaction unconfirmed chain limit and allowed multiple OP_RETURNs. U8 in 2022 added native transaction introspection and 64-bit integer arithmetic — the opcodes that made covenant-based contracts practical. CashTokens in 2023 activated native fungible tokens and NFTs at the consensus layer, miner-validated, UTXO-native. ABLA in 2024 replaced the fixed 32MB block size limit with an algorithmic floating ceiling — 32MB became the floor, not the cap. VMLA/Velma in 2025 delivered BigInt, removing the VM's fixed integer length limit entirely, which is specifically what made ZK proof verification buildable on BCH's base layer. Layla in 2026 added bounded loops, function definitions, and bitwise opcodes. Six upgrades. Six years. Zero chain splits during that run. BTC's lane in the same timeline: Taproot activated November 2021. Then nothing at the base layer until August 2026, when BIP-110 — a proposal to temporarily restrict Ordinals-style data inscriptions — entered its mandatory miner-signaling window. It drew roughly 2.5% miner support against a 55% activation threshold. Nodes that chose to enforce it split onto a minority chain, which stalled after two blocks. Around the same time, Michael Saylor publicly framed BTC's consensus rules as a "constitution" — arguing base-layer changes should be rare and require near-unanimity, explicitly including covenants and larger blocks in that framing. BTC's resistance to base-layer change is a deliberate design goal, not a failure. Immutability is the point. A base layer that resists change is exactly what "digital gold" optimizes for. State that plainly, because the contrast only lands if you're representing both sides accurately. The structural gap is this: BCH and BTC are now running visibly different models, and those models have produced visibly different outcomes over the same five-year window. BCH's CHIP process — Cash Improvement Proposal — requires proposals to gather explicit written support from wallets, mining pools, exchanges, and node developers before an activation date. Rough consensus, not unanimity. A high bar that filters out proposals without genuine broad support. Three independent node implementations — Bitcoin Cash Node, BCHD, and Knuth — each evaluate CHIPs independently. When all three ship the same upgrade on the same schedule, that's what coordinated decentralized consensus looks like in practice. Now the quantum thread, because it connects directly to the governance question. A March 2026 paper from Google Quantum AI, Stanford, and the Ethereum Foundation estimated that breaking 256-bit elliptic-curve cryptography — the signature scheme both BCH and BTC use — would require under 500,000 physical qubits. Roughly 20 times fewer than earlier estimates. No machine close to that exists today, but the timeline tightened. Both chains face the same underlying exposure. ECDSA on secp256k1 is what both use. A large enough quantum computer running Shor's algorithm could forge signatures on either chain, primarily targeting addresses whose public keys are already exposed on-chain. BCH's response: Quantumroot, built by Jason Dreyzehner — the author of CashTokens — is a post-quantum vault system written as a Bitcoin Script contract using LM-OTS (RFC 8554), a hash-based signature scheme secured only by SHA-256. No lattice-based cryptography, no experimental primitives. It's live on Chipnet, BCH's six-month preview testnet. The contracts, test suites, and tooling are published. It was buildable without any consensus change because BCH's 2025-2026 opcode additions made the VM expressive enough to implement it as a contract. Represent the status accurately: Quantumroot is testnet only, no announced mainnet date, targets long-term holdings rather than everyday spending, and post-quantum transactions are larger at roughly 1.5 KB each. This is a real, testable path — not a finished product. The governance connection is the notable part. A comparable base-layer fix on BTC would require a consensus change. That's the kind of change currently in explicit dispute, with a leading voice in the BTC ecosystem arguing the base layer should function as a near-immutable constitution. BCH's scripting was expressive enough for someone to build and deploy a working post-quantum vault as a contract. The upgrade model that produced that expressiveness shipped six times in six years without a chain split. The honest accounting goes in the same post, because BCH's track record cuts both ways. BCH has its own contentious fork history. BSV split from BCH in November 2018 over smart contract direction. eCash/XEC split from BCH in November 2020 over the Infrastructure Funding Proposal. Both splits happened before the current CHIP process matured. BCH trades at well under 1% of BTC's market cap. The upgrade model is working — that doesn't mean BCH has won anything. What the six-year track record demonstrates is narrower than that: a decentralized chain with no central authority can coordinate meaningful protocol upgrades on a predictable annual schedule, through a public deliberation process, without splitting. The CHIP process solved it by making the bar for inclusion high enough that only proposals with genuine broad support ship, and by giving every stakeholder a public venue to raise objections before the activation date — not after. Two chains. Two governance models. One optimizes for immutability, one for evolvability. The timeline shows what each model has shipped.

Play to win, not to not-lose.

v1.4 Release: - NEW Stakeholder page: Review past upgrade stakeholder behaviour, Felicia tracking coming soon! - Project page updated with comments, contributors, slim view & more - Priorities page updated with better visualisation, filters & more Dive into the data!

v1.3 is here - and it's a good one. New Projects & Priorities pages so community can add sentiment about non-CHIP BCH stuff. What is the hivemind feeling about the ecosystem generally? Jump in & give your takes! Also, time capsules. Watch sentiment evolve over time!

🚀 BCH Launch is live! Need a website? Tell us what you want, and we’ll build it for you. 💻 Custom websites 🟢 Pay in BCH ⚡ Starting at $99 Describe it. Build it. Launch it. 👉 bchlaunch.com @BitcoinCashOG

Muito interessante essa quantidade de comerciantes na Filipinas aceitando $BCH como meio de pagamento.