Bitcoin's fork narrative reemerges! The new chain eCash plans to launch in August, proposing pre-mined Satoshi coins sparking controversy

Author: Nancy, PANews

In 2020, Bitcoin Cash (BCH) forked to create eCash; more than five years later, Bitcoin is once again seeing a fork narrative, and another same-name hard fork project has drawn attention.

Not long ago, Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc announced that he would launch a new Bitcoin hard fork network called eCash and would air drop it to Bitcoin holders. The news quickly sparked heated discussion in the community. However, eCash ran into controversy even before the new chain went live—especially because the plan would pre-allocate some tokens corresponding to Satoshi addresses to early investors and the development team.

Another hard fork experiment is underway—eCash to launch this August

On April 28, Paul Sztorc announced that he is pushing forward a Bitcoin hard fork project named eCash, which is expected to officially launch on August 21, 2026, at a Bitcoin block height of about 964,000.

The project will fork from the Bitcoin main chain. At that time, all Bitcoin holders on the chain will automatically receive an equal amount of eCash in a 1:1 ratio. Whether exchange users can receive the air drop is up to the platform. Holders are free to choose to sell, keep, or ignore these new coins.

Sztorc is a long-time Bitcoin developer and the proposer of the Drivechains solution. He also serves as CEO of LayerTwo Labs, a sidechain development company for the Bitcoin network.

eCash is positioned as a long-term solution to address Bitcoin’s scalability, innovation stagnation, and governance problems. According to the information, eCash’s Layer 1 node software will be an almost complete copy of Bitcoin Core. It will continue to use the SHA-256 hashing algorithm and will significantly reduce the initial mining difficulty to attract more miners to participate early. The client code will be frozen 30 days before the fork, and multiple rounds of bug bounty programs are planned to be launched in the summer.

The biggest highlight of eCash is its integration of seven Layer 2 Drivechains expansion networks, covering privacy chains (similar to Zcash), the prediction market Truthcoin, the decentralized exchange CoinShift, the NFT asset platform Bitassets, the identity system Bitnames, and the quantum-resistant network Photon, among others. These Drivechains enable high throughput, programmability, and diversified applications without modifying L1 rules, aiming to support a global user base of 8 billion. At the same time, they all support merged mining, allowing miners to earn additional rewards while maintaining the main chain.

Drivechains are a Bitcoin sidechain scaling solution that Sztorc first proposed in 2015, later evolving into BIP 300 and BIP 301 proposals. The technology allows miners to use existing hash power to maintain the sidechain, tightly binding the sidechain’s security to the Bitcoin mainnet. It is intended to solve Bitcoin’s scalability issues and feature expansion bottlenecks. Since 2015, Sztorc has been promoting Drivechains and previously tried to introduce them via a soft fork without success; this time, he chose a hard fork as an experimental proving ground.

Sztorc believes that a competitive ecosystem made up of multiple L2 networks can effectively prevent excessive concentration of developer power, and also gives Bitcoin the potential to serve billions of users worldwide.

Unlike the 2017 Bitcoin Cash fork, eCash did not reuse Bitcoin’s brand name. It provided ample notice to the market in advance and will offer coin-splitting tools to help users safely separate their assets.

Sztorc said this fork is not strictly necessary from a technical standpoint, but instead stems from the current state of the Bitcoin community. He believes Bitcoin Core developers have become conservative, self-interested, lazy, and corrupt, and that miners have not fulfilled their responsibility to maximize returns. He argues that there are many deep-seated problems in Bitcoin culture that are difficult to fix. Therefore, he chose to restart the experiment with a hard fork.

The reason for enabling eCash as the name is to pay tribute to cryptographer David Chaum. In the 1980s and 1990s, Chaum launched a project of the same name—eCash—exploring privacy-preserving electronic payments through blind signature technology. Although his company DigiCash ultimately went bankrupt in 1998, this early experiment is seen as one of the important inspirations for the evolution of cryptocurrencies.

Proposed Satoshi coin allocations spark controversy, accused of hype marketing

eCash is trying, through a Bitcoin hard fork, to build an experimental network that both inherits Bitcoin’s economic system and boldly advances Layer 2 innovation. After the project was announced, it quickly attracted market attention, but its token allocation mechanism immediately triggered intense controversy.

Under the current plan, the eCash chain will fully copy Bitcoin’s historical ledger, including the balances of the long-dormant addresses attributed to Satoshi—about 1.1 million BTC. However, about half of it—50,000 to 55,000 eCash—is planned to be reassigned to early investors and the development team. The funds will be used for R&D incentives ahead of the project launch, ecosystem building, and to attract contributors, so that the new chain does not become a zombie project due to insufficient funding.

This arrangement was quickly opposed by some members of the Bitcoin community. Critics argue that this violates Bitcoin’s core principle of “code is law,” and in essence reallocates the rights to asset mappings of others without authorization.

Jameson Lopp, a well-known Bitcoin developer and the Chief Security Officer of Casa, said that this is not Satoshi’s Bitcoin—rather, it is UTXOs believed to belong to Satoshi that are copied and modified onto a completely different network. This is a very shrewd, provocative marketing move. If Satoshi’s assets were to be reassigned on the Bitcoin main chain, only the entire Bitcoin ecosystem would need to collectively accept that hard fork.

In response, Paul Sztorc said this is “a decision that will undoubtedly cause controversy,” but it is also a realistic and necessary choice that can effectively address the resource dilemma when a new project is launched.

He also emphasized that eCash will not affect Satoshi’s Bitcoin holdings or anyone else’s Bitcoin holdings on the Bitcoin main chain; the original chain assets are completely unaffected. On the contrary, the scheme is equivalent to gifting Satoshi about 600,000 eCash. Meanwhile, any Bitcoin transfer always requires the private key and software from the Bitcoin main chain.

At present, community sentiment is clearly split. Supporters believe that Bitcoin’s scalability path now has only two routes: large blocks or sidechains. The Core team has long taken a conservative stance toward both. At least, eCash provides a new experimental opportunity.

Opponents believe that Drivechains give miners too much power, which could lead to early block rewards being monopolized, and even—under extreme circumstances—the risk of a “hashpower majority” misappropriating funds. They argue that this framework has been rejected by the community multiple times in the past, and now it is merely being repackaged under the banner of a new token. In the future, other projects may imitate it. A more realistic problem, they say, is that historically, most Bitcoin hard fork projects have ultimately failed to establish long-term value.

Overall, eCash is still at the early proposal stage. Whether it can be launched smoothly, adopted by the market, and form sustainable value remains highly uncertain.

LAYOUT REFERENCE (source): total_lines=49, non_empty_lines=25, blank_lines=24