Paul Sztorc's proposed eCash fork has sparked debate, but many developers argue it is not a hostile Bitcoin fork but rather a potentially hazardous airdrop. Sergio Lerner, co-founder of Rootstock Labs, told CoinDesk that eCash is a new blockchain and does not directly take anything away from Bitcoin holders. However, distributing eCash based on Bitcoin’s UTXO set exposes users to significant risks, including the need to move funds from cold storage and interact with unfamiliar software.
The lack of full replay protection between the two chains compounds these risks. Without a clean separation, transactions intended for Bitcoin could inadvertently affect funds on the eCash network, or vice versa. Bitcoin entrepreneur Dan Held called the reallocation of Satoshi's coins 'shock value marketing' and warned that the no-replay protection makes redemption hazardous.
Distribution issues also arise because custodians controlling UTXO keys may not be the economic owners, placing users who hold Bitcoin through custodians at a disadvantage. Lerner criticized the project’s funding model, which allocates Satoshi-linked coins to early investors, calling it 'morally objectionable and unnecessary.'
Jay Polack of Bitcoin sidechain VerifiedX argued that attempts to reinterpret Bitcoin’s core properties through derivative systems are contradictory to Bitcoin's nature. Most Bitcoin forks fail to gain traction, and eCash may follow the same path, but the reaction highlights Bitcoin’s resistance to change extends beyond code to user behavior and acceptable experiments.
