Litecoin vs Bitcoin Cash, the history, the tech, and the people behind the projects - BTC LTC BCH BCC

LITECOIN

The first version of Litecoin, or what it evolved from, was called Tenebrix the first scrypt algo coin. It was initially designed to be ASIC resistant so the distribution could be more fair. A great idea even though ASICs were made in the long run regardless. However, the key problem with Tenebrix was that it contained a premine so it did not last.

The next version was Fairbrix by Charlie Lee without a premine, but this was back in the earliest days of crypto and there was a problem with the launch due to a 51% attack, so this was not successful. The final version, the one we all know, Litecoin, incorporated some code from Bitcoin and fixed the flaws from the earlier versions. Clearly, this version was a success.

A key advantage of Litecoin is that it had a fair launch and this is critical compared to even Bitcoin, and therefore Bitcoin Cash. At the time of the LTC launch, there was at least some awareness of cryptocurrency and a reasonable amount of people were able to participate, unlike the tiny handful that mined Bitcoin early. This means the distribution was wider than Bitcoin to a greater number of people. This matters as the distribution of Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash are essentially identical.

This means that the whales and insiders that control most of the Bitcoin, Alts, Markets, everything, the very earliest adopters that were buying Bitcoin for pennies, also control Bitcoin Cash. While they may deny it, this is a very centralized distribution and is one of the biggest flaws of even Bitcoin, but of course, it was first and impossible to have a wide audience to mine and start fairly with it. Not only that, Satoshi’s coins also exist in Bitcoin Cash far as I know, and while those appear likely to remain dormant forever that is not a sure thing.

Now, what could be looked at as a negative for Litecoin, it is clear they had plenty of hash power lined up for the launch, from what I heard anyway, but remember, the previous version had been 51% attacked at the launch so Litecoin needed a strong network from the start to lower this risk. Without it, the same people could have just 51% attacked the next version and ruined it from the start.

BITCOIN CASH

Bitcoin Cash, of course, is the most popular fork of Bitcoin and has some minor but important differences. The key difference is not having Segwit. Segwit is a second layer solution that can allow for a vast amount of off chain scaling with the upcoming Lightning Network. This is not part of the original white paper by Satoshi, and some argue this is a form of centralization. Therefore Roger Ver and others claiming Bitcoin Cash is closer to the original white paper than Bitcoin has some merit.

Bitcoin Cash also has bigger blocks and can scale now and handle transaction volume now. It is not used as much as Bitcoin, but if it was, it would likely scale just fine without issue. Those that have followed the big block vs little block debate know all this stuff, but the short version is that bigger blocks take more storage space for those running full nodes, and therefore some say this will centralize Bitcoin. Other claim storage capacity will outpace this and most people run lightweight clients, so it does not matter.

Unlike Litecoin that uses Scrypt, Bitcoin Cash uses the same algorithm as Bitcoin, SHA-256. This is actually a pro and a con at the same time, let me explain; The Bitcoin network is the strongest in the world, much stronger than Litecoin. So if everyone mined Bitcoin Cash and abandoned Bitcoin, this would make Bitcoin Cash the strongest and most secure Network, and by incentivizing miners to switch this is not totally impossible. The con, however, is that this means if Bitcoin Cash were to grow, there could be risks of SHA-256 51% attacks, on Bitcoin Cash, or on Bitcoin.

That means even though the network of Bitcoin is vastly stronger than Litecoin, a divided Bitcoin network is not safe or secure, even potentially attacking each other in the worst case. Bitcoin Cash could also not be successful or popular enough and become vulnerable to an attack by pro-Bitcoin activists, willing to do whatever it takes. Litecoin does not have that situation at all, Scrypt ASICs mine a few different coins but Litecoin merge mines the most popular Scrypt Alt and has little risk of being attacked as miners need the success Litecoin to stay in profits.

PROS AND CONS

Bitcoin Cash, while not by Roger Ver is clearly championed by Roger Ver. This has the big blocks he loves and is closer to the original Bitcoin White Paper. Roger Ver is one of the most influential people in the crypto space controlling media and mining facilities and he controls a vast fortune from getting in BTC early and earlier successes. He is also the CEO of Bitcoin.com, clearly, a place most new people would first search for Bitcoin. This is a huge pro for Bitcoin Cash.

The most obvious pro for Bitcoin cash is just the brand itself. This is something that Roger Ver made very clear when he lost control in an interview when he was confronted hearing “Bcash,” Roger knows the entire value is really in the Brand “Bitcoin,” not in the slight tweaks to Bitcoin as there have been countless alts with much more important innovations. So all the value is in the name and everyone who is honest knows it. This is a huge pro for Bitcoin Cash, fair or not.

The con, Roger Ver is so influential it could be argued he is essentially a cult of personality and appears adamant and determined to get his way, so it could be argued he has almost total control over the direction of Bitcoin Cash. Recently, he has also become a controversial figure in the crypto space, especially once he started taking on Bitcoin and stating that Bitcoin Cash is the “Real Bitcoin.” People are going to either love that or hate it with a passion, there is no room for compromise.

Litecoin, created by Charlie Lee, is also very influential in the crypto space, but he does not have the reach or influence of Roger Ver,he is still one of the most influential people out there with a very large following. Additionally, he is not a controversial figure and there are few people that have any problems with Charlie Lee. Most people simply like and respect him, unless they have some blind hatred for Alts. Not being too controversial can make it easier to get serious deals done, so this is a big positive.

The biggest con for Litecoin is also a pro for Bitcoin Cash. The branding. Bitcoin is an iconic brand that people all around the world are hearing about, some of them have heard of Litecoin, but almost everyone knows about Bitcoin. If they search for Bitcoin online they will likely end up at Roger Ver’s site where he has a wallet for Bitcoin, that also is a wallet for Bitcoin Cash. So the branding gives a huge edge over Litecoin even if many people think it is unfair to take the Bitcoin brand.

SUMMARY AND PERSONAL OPINION

The branding of Bitcoin Cash gives it a big edge over Litecoin in terms of recognition, Bitcoin Cash is closer to the original Satoshi White Paper, although technically, in my view Litecoin is theoretically better as a “digital cash.” It can scale better than Bitcoin Cash now and will scale way better in the future, short of some unknown technology yet to come. And there are no risks of being 51% attacked by something like, Bitcoin, the strongest network on earth.

The distribution of Litecoin is much better, essential for a fair currency. Bitcoin Cash more like a free gift to the whales. Handing out a bunch of coins to the already rich that got in early on Bitcoin, is not exactly a fair way to distribute a coin. It is more like free money printed out of thin air like a giant premine. Truth is, there was no proof of work for almost the entire supply of Bitcoin cash, they were just forked into existence almost like a fiat currency, and that is certainly not the true vision of Satoshi.