debate Archives -
When Anaheim voters go to the polls Nov. 6, they will decide whether large hospitality companies that receive a tax rebate from the city will be forced to pay their workers a “living wage.”
What is unclear is whether the initiative, Measure L, will apply to the city’s biggest employer of all, the…
Over the last few weeks, there’s been a heated discussion within the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) community concerning the scheduled November 15 hard fork. There’s a strong disagreement between the BCH development teams, Bitcoin ABC, Nchain, and Bitcoin Unlimited in regard to the hard fork’s upcoming consensus changes. Fast forward to this week as Nchain has published the Bitcoin SV beta release, Coingeek’s Calvin Ayre speaks out against chain splitting rumors, and there have also been a few insightful studies done on Bitcoin ABC’s proposed canonical transaction ordering (CTOR) upgrade.
Nchain Launches Bitcoin SV Beta Version
Last week’s BCH Stress Test Day took everyone’s minds off of the ongoing upgrade debate taking place within the Bitcoin Cash community. It all started during the last week of July when Bitcoin ABC revealed the team’s roadmap and published the 0.18 ABC codebase in the second week of August. Nchain’s chief scientist Craig Wright was one of the first to oppose the upgrades proposed by the ABC team. Wright explained he was vehemently against adding the opcode called OP_CHECKDATASIG (CDS), and the implementation of canonical transaction ordering (CTOR). Wright detailed his team Nchain would create their own BCH full node client that would entail completely different upgrades within the codebase. Nchain disclosed the new client would be called Bitcoin SV (Satoshi’s Vision) and the full node client will restore the Satoshi opcodes OP_MUL, OP_LSHIFT, OP_RSHIFT, OP_INVERT, remove the 201 opcode script limit, and increase the base block size to 128MB.
About a week and a half ago BCH miners, developers, and industry leaders met in Bangkok to try and hash out the differences, but the meeting didn’t pay off with any compromise between the disagreeing camps. At the time Nchain also launched the Bitcoin SV alpha release and revealed a new mining pool dedicated to the SV codebase. Now, this week Nchain has released the Bitcoin SV beta version on Github. Observers have noted that there was some newly added code related to the 128M increase, some revised release documentation, and some other minor changes.
Coingeek & Calvin Ayre: We Will Fight Any Attempts by Anyone That Cause a Chain Split
On Monday, September 10 Calvin Ayre, owner of the blockchain firm and mining pool Coingeek, explained in a recent post that his company will not allow a hash war to split the BCH chain. Ayre emphasizes that his firm has never had the intention of splitting the true version of Bitcoin (BCH).
“We will fight any attempts by anyone else to cause a chain split,” Ayre details. “Coingeek and friends believe in the Satoshi Vision for the evolution of Bitcoin and that means all disputes should be settled by Nakamoto consensus and miner hash elections.”
Nakamoto consensus dictates that at all times the longest chain (with the most Proof-of-Work) shall prevail and this will be respected at all times by Coingeek media and mining.
Ayre believes other “contentious, untested and unnecessary protocol changes” have recently been introduced to the BCH community, placing a lot of blame on the Chinese mining firm Bitmain Technologies. The Coingeek owner says Bitmain seeks “to constantly experiment with the protocol creating constant instability and driving corporate investment away.” Bitmain has denied all of the Wormhole security issues and CTOR allegations in a recent blog post addressing these accusations. Ayre says he and Coingeek are quite confident that in the end, smart miners will not follow a path towards their own annihilation.
Coingeek is confident that no miners are stupid enough to support a path that leads to their own destruction so we are also confident that this election will be won by the miners and will prove the wisdom of Satoshi Vision.
Some Examinations of CTOR
Lastly, there’s been a lot of insightful studies concerning the CTOR upgrade proposed for November. A post on r/btc gives a comprehensive technical dive into the implementation of canonical transaction ordering. Many developers such as Andrew Stone, Peter Rizun, and Amaury Sechet discussed the topic within the post’s comment section.
According to the study, CTOR could theoretically benefit ideas like Graphene and possibly help with the mempool bottleneck. The author of the post explains, “In the last stress test, we also saw limitations on mempool performance (tx acceptance and relaying). I hope both of these fronts see optimizations before the next stress test, so that a fresh set of bottlenecks can be revealed.”
Further, the BCH mining pool Rawpool has also published a review of CTOR this week. Rawpool’s study is insightful and details that the mining pool has been testing the new upgrade. Essentially Rawpool details that the current method the Bitcoin protocol uses right now is topical transaction ordering (TTOR). However, the study says that in time it “cannot be denied” that “traditional TTOR sorting will inevitably face problems such as rising memory overhead and increasing computing time.”
“On the other hand, the fully optimized CTOR ordering should be a completely new data maintenance system, which is bound to have considerable complexity,” Rawpool’s translated research explains.
Rawpool will continue to communicate with the development teams of Bitcoin ABC and Nchain. The deployment of test nodes has been completed and will actively participate in the testing of new upgrades and stress testing throughout the network.
For Now, the BCH November Upgrade Debate Still Remains Unsettled
There’s been a lot of discussions and debates regarding the November 15th BCH upgrade. Bitcoin Unlimited’s lead developer has also critiqued canonical ordering in a post that declares “ABC’s CTOR will not scale.” Stone says that there are two significant problems with CTOR and he explains the sharding proposal (scaling by distributing data to multiple machines) “will not work,” and “lexicographical transaction ordering is unnecessary.” Moreover, Nchain’s Craig Wright has been writing a lot of long-form posts about this subject and generalized Bitcoin topics concerning the technology’s economics nearly every single day.
For now, it seems the debate will continue, and Bitcoin Cash proponents will have to wait to find out what will happen when it gets closer to the upgrade. News.Bitcoin.com will be sure to keep our readers informed every step of the way.
What do you think about the BCH November upgrade debate? Do you think the disagreeing parties will come to a compromise? Let us know in the comment section below.
Images via Shutterstock, Twitter, Coingeek, and Pixabay.
Verify and track bitcoin cash transactions on our BCH Block Explorer, the best of its kind anywhere in the world. Also, keep up with your holdings, BCH, and other coins, on our market charts at Satoshi Pulse, another original and free service from Bitcoin.com.
The post Bitcoin Cash Hard Fork Debate Reconvenes After the Stress Test appeared first on Bitcoin News.
Next Monday will witness an eagerly anticipated debate between two of bitcoin’s leading figures. Bitcoin.com CEO Roger Ver and Bitcoin Core developer Jimmy Song will go head-to-head aboard a blockchain cruise on the Mediterranean. The debate promises to be one of the highlights of the three-day event, watched by 2,500 delegates aboard Coinsbank’s chartered vessel.
Roger Ver and Jimmy Song Will Talk Bitcoin in Ibiza
On Friday September 7, Coinsbank’s Blockchain Cruise will depart from Barcelona with 2,500 cryptocurrency enthusiasts on board. Among those present will be a number of the industry’s leading figures including such mavericks as John McAfee and Brock Pierce. On September 10, the cruise liner will dock in Ibiza, where one for sure highlight of the trip is scheduled to take place.
At 1pm, Roger Ver and Jimmy Song will face one another in a debate that has been framed as Cash vs Core. Bitcoin.com CEO Roger Ver is a passionate advocate of Bitcoin Cash and its low fees, on-chain scaling, and focus on real world adoption. Jimmy Song, on the other hand, is a proud Bitcoin Core evangelist. Through his writing and development work, he has been a tireless source of support for all things Bitcoin. Both men were preaching the gospel of Bitcoin before it was cool, and remain staunch proponents to this day.
Two Bitcoin Heavyweights With a Lot to Discuss
While Roger Ver and Jimmy Song have huge respect for one another, it would be fair to say there are certain matters where they don’t see eye-to-eye. It is likely that such topics as Lightning Network and Bitcoin’s classification as a store of value or medium of exchange will crop up, with each debater bound to give no quarter. Variously billed as the “Row on a Boat” and “Bitcoin Battle on a Boat”, Roger Ver and Jimmy Song’s head-to-head debate is sure to be filled with pithy soundbites and talking points.
Following the pair’s heated debate, passengers can cool down on land at the Cafe del Mar party that commences at 6:30pm on the island of Ibiza. At this stage, the Blockchain Cruise will dovetail with Futurama’s Blockchain Innovators Summit that will be getting kick-started. Futurama delegates will have a chance to party with Coinsbank passengers on the Monday night before commencing their own three-day event the following morning. For those fortunate enough to be in attendance, Roger Ver and Jimmy Song’s debate will cap a voyage that will be filled with memorable highlights.
Who do you think will have the upper hand in Roger Ver and Jimmy Song’s debate? Let us know in the comments section below.
Images courtesy of Coinsbank.
Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.
The post Roger Ver and Jimmy Song to Debate Bitcoin on Blockchain Cruise appeared first on Bitcoin News.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and former Sex and the City star Cynthia Nixon swapped insults and clashed over policy Wednesday in their only scheduled debate before the Sept. 13 Democratic primary. While the testy, hourlong exchange at Hofstra University featured plenty of interruptions and insults, neither candidate landed the…
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democratic socialist congressional candidate from New York City, missed an opportunity when she recently refused conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro’s invitation to debate.
This past Thursday, the lead developer of Bitcoin ABC, Amaury Séchet, published a paper on the social media platform Yours.org about a protocol technique called ‘pre-consensus.’ According to Séchet, and other BCH developers like Bitcoin Unlimited’s Peter Rizun, pre-consensus could improve block propagation time, benefit zero-confirmation reliability and help delegate decisions tethered to consensus conditions.
Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Séchet Publishes a Paper Called ‘On Markets and Pre-Consensus’
This week, Amaury Séchet, the Bitcoin ABC client’s lead developer announced on Twitter that he had wrote a paper called, “On Markets and Pre-Consensus.” The article discusses the concept of pre-consensus which Séchet describes as a protocol that enables network participants to agree on what the next block size will look like. Various developers have discussed this idea before, including Bitcoin Unlimited’s chief scientist, Peter Rizun, who wrote about the subject for the Ledger academic publication, and Rizun also discussed pre-consensus during his talk at the Satoshi’s Vision Conference in Tokyo.
“Even before Bitcoin Cash was a thing, I was promoting the idea of pre-consensus — This refers to a set of technologies allowing network participants to agree as much as possible on what the next block is going to look like,” explains Séchet’s paper. “If done well, this provides significantly stronger 0-conf guarantee that we currently have, while also allowing to reach greater scale by moving work out of the critical path (if a node know what the next block is going to look like, a lot of the validation work can be done ahead of time).”
As it turns out, pre-consensus has the added bonus effect that it allows to delegate the responsibility of picking various values which are currently centrally planned to the market. Actors who use different policies will be able to reconcile their differences in a time scale that is compatible with 0-conf.
Séchet Says Pre-Consensus ‘Too Important to Not be Tackled Now’
Séchet delves further and states that pre-consensus has been on the BCH roadmap since day one, and has made “zero progress” so far. He explains that the past year had been hectic and the latest “flavor of the day” is tokens.
“While all these projects have value, it is clear that I need to ruthlessly prioritize pre-consensus,” Séchet emphasizes.
The actions I have to take along the way will surely irritate many, but this is too important to not be tackled now.
Nchain’s Craig Wright: ‘No Hash Goes to This Crap — They Want It, They Fork It’
After Séchet published his idea and fellow colleagues began to share the paper on Twitter, Nchain’s chief scientist Craig Wright spoke out against the pre-consensus idea. “No hash goes to this crap — They want it, they fork it, without us,” Wright states on Twitter. “Without the apps using our code, our IP etc. — Without the companies, we have invested in.” Of course, the outburst from Wright got the community stirring wildly into a heated discussion.
There’s also a Reddit conversation about pre-consensus and Wright’s comments on the subreddit r/BTC which has over 400 comments at the time of writing. The top comment belongs to Bitcoin Unlimited’s lead developer, Andrew Stone. “At Satoshi’s Vision Conference, Craig Wright said his miners were going to detect and somehow penalize double spends which is a form of pre-consensus,” Stone says. “We don’t even know concretely what Deadalnix (Amaury Séchet) is proposing so how can a person reject it and call it crap?”
An Avalanche of Pre-Consensus Emotions
Other developers such as the Yours.org founder, Ryan X Charles, seemed to be interested in the idea of pre-consensus when discussing the subject in one of his latest videos. Charles gives his viewers a glimpse of what he thinks about Séchet’s latest statements, and details there is also a paper called, Avalanche, which offers a unique approach to pre-consensus. The paper “Avalanche: A Novel Metastable Consensus Protocol Family for Cryptocurrencies,” was written by a group of developers who call themselves ‘Team Rocket’ after the mischievous Pokémon characters.
Other members of the community dislike the idea of pre-consensus and have shared their responses to Séchet’s recent article. One person’s post on Yours.org called “Pre-Consensus Implies Content Without Giving It,” is particularly interesting. In the writing, the author compares pre-consensus to the Segregated Witness protocol (Segwit) perverting the underlying foundations of Nakamoto Consensus.
“This will change if we make a fundamental protocol change like a pre-consensus,” explains the author @Logan.
We will be in the same position as Segwit, making the argument that Bitcoin needs to change and adapt over time. We will no longer be the protocol as described in the white paper.
What do you think about Séchet’s pre-consensus statements? What do you think about Nchain’s Craig Wright disagreeing with the idea? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comment section below.
Images via Shutterstock,Twitter, Pixabay, and Wiki Commons.
Verify and track bitcoin cash transactions on our BCH Block Explorer, the best of its kind anywhere in the world. Also, keep up with your holdings, BCH, and other coins, on our market charts at Satoshi Pulse, another original and free service from Bitcoin.com.
The post Bitcoin Cash Developers Debate an Idea Called Pre-Consensus appeared first on Bitcoin News.
At the hour and twenty four minute mark, slightly more than half way in their time together, famed bitcoin (BTC) skeptic Peter Schiff brought the conversation back to his favorite foil: cryptocurrencies are bunk. It was Mr. Schiff’s third appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast, and he took the opportunity to blast the world’s most popular decentralized money, insist a recent debate between him and the CEO of Shapeshift on the subject was rigged, and how he believes BTC’s price will crash further to $ 1,000 and lower.
Skeptic Peter Schiff Blasts Voorhees Debate, Bitcoin
The Joe Rogan Experience (JRE) keeps bringing bitcoin skeptic Peter Schiff back on. And it’s no wonder, as each time the two men hold close to three hour uninterrupted conversations over the last four years, the public seems to eat it up: JRE #445 (2014) not quite a quarter million views, #1002 (2017) has racked up over 1.1 million views, and #1145 (2018), of only a few days ago, already is nearing 700k views.
When all is said and done, over two million people would have been exposed to free market economics and expressly mainstream US libertarian thought — those, and also why bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are horrible bubbles.
Widely acknowledged as a gold bug, Mr. Schiff explained to Mr. Rogan how “… that’s the whole selling point of bitcoin. It’s digital gold.” He further noted BTC does have similar properties, but that its being math and not physical means it ultimately lacks real utility (something like the Greater Fool theory).
“Technically, I lost the debate, but I think it was rigged,” Mr. Schiff then concluded, moving his monologue through a non sequitur. The reference is to a contest on the subject of bitcoin hosted by The Soho Forum in New York City earlier this month, whereby he debated Shapeshift CEO Erik Voorhees. Mr. Schiff blamed his loss on a largely pro-bitcoin audience, which he also assured was told to fib on the initial poll of their true feelings about crypto so as to ensure his eventual defeat.
BTC Will Fall Thousands More in Price
The format of the debate was such that winners were determined by the percentage grown to a debater’s position — so even if the audience was already in the bag for bitcoin, all Mr. Schiff had to do was convince more of them than Mr. Voorhees. That didn’t happen, and by a lot.
Transitioning on his way to explaining how bitcoiners are cultish (Mr. Rogan described them as very “tribal”), naive playboys living it up in his new home commonwealth island of Puerto Rico, he admitted to having missed out on a pretty radical runup since BTC’s inception to now. He explained the digital asset was “taylor made” for him and his politics, but he “knew” even back then it was something of a scam. He called it a bubble. He also insisted a lot people are destined to be hurt financially.
Ironically, as Mr. Schiff was once again predicting BTC’s death (something he’s been doing for almost a decade), the price actually rallied to well above the seven thousand mark. Nevertheless, Mr. Rogan followed Mr. Schiff’s line of reasoning, asking, “… you think it’s going down?” Mr. Schiff affirmed enthusiastically, patting himself on the back as knowing bitcoin well enough not to be fooled … as he mistakenly referred to “Satoshi Nakamora” [sic] as its pseudonymous founder (Mr. Schiff is also famous for malapropisms). He ranted, when BTC dips “… and it keeps falling, it goes down to $ 1,000, or lower, where I think it’s going … that’s going to create a lot of problems.”
Perhaps, Mr. Schiff’s most salient point was when, in his doom scenario, BTC loses a lot of people a lot of money, this will bring in government crackdowns like never before. The fear, he insists, is that such a crash and resulting government response will prove to the public how free markets and capitalism are best served through intense regulation. He believes that will inadvertently buttress hopelessly “flawed” fiat currencies, something everyone in the current debate dreads.
Does Peter Schiff have a point? Let us know your thoughts on this subject in the comment section below.
Images via Pixabay, Euro Pacific Capital, Joe Rogan Experience.
The post Bitcoin Skeptic Peter Schiff to Joe Rogan: BTC Will Plummet, Voorhees Debate Rigged appeared first on Bitcoin News.
This week Andrew Stone, the lead developer of Bitcoin Unlimited (BU), published a 42-page paper that details the evolution of the original OP_Group proposal. Now simply called ‘Group,’ the proposal involves a single OP_Code that could be added to the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) network’s scripting language in order to effectively create colored coins. However, unlike other representative token protocols like Omni or Counterparty, if the Group protocol was used it would require a protocol change, and miners would validate colored coins within the confirmation of normal transactions.
Bitcoin Unlimited’s Andrew Stone Publishes the Evolution of the Group Proposal
Earlier this week, news.Bitcoin.com reported on the upcoming Bitcoin Cash (BCH) network upgrade that will take place in November. The Bitcoin ABC development team revealed a timeline of certain goals like building and polishing the 0.18 ABC software and launching the client by October 15. However, the developers didn’t detail exactly what will be included in the next upgrade.
A few days later, Bitcoin Unlimited’s Andrew Stone published the evolution of the OP_Group proposal which is an implementation that could effectively add a plethora of features like representative tokens. Although, the Group proposal does not have broad consensus just yet as other developers have alternative ideas for colored coin creation and some think the OP_Group may be risky.
Group Could Extend the BCH Script Language to Allow a Plethora of Features
Bitcoin Unlimited’s lead developer Andrew Stone believes the community should listen and participate in the colored coin discussion. Alongside publishing the 42-page document, Stone has also left a video of the discussion that features the BCH ‘Token Work Group.’ The group consists of developers such as BU’s Stone, and Andrea Suisani, Bitcoin.com’s Emil Oldenburg, Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Sechet, Shammah Chancellor, Jason Cox, Nchain’s Steve Shadders, Daniel Connolly, and the Electron Cash developer Jonald Fyookball.
“This is the evolution of the original OP_Group proposal — It’s no longer an opcode, so name change,” Stone explains. “The document is a bit long but that’s because it lays out a roadmap to extending the BCH script language to allow some pretty awesome features but at the same time preserving bitcoin script’s efficiency. For example, in the end, I show how you could create a bet with OP_Datasigverify, and then tokenize the outcome of that bet to create a prediction market.”
I strongly urge people to listen carefully to this discussion, even if you are not that interested in tokens, as it shows pretty clear philosophical differences that will likely influence BCH development for years to come.
Some Proponents Disagree With OP_Group and They Believe Tokenization Can Happen Without Making BCH Consensus Changes
Basically, Bitcoin Cash proponents who disagree with Stone’s Group proposal favor tokenization ideas that don’t require a change to the BCH codebase. Further, some people believe it would be safer to use protocols that work outside the main chain and operate like a sidechain or something similar. Another idea being discussed is ‘Tokeda,’ a token-driven metadata proposal written by Joannes Vermorel. The 31-page Tokeda proposal is also an early draft last updated, March 30, 2018, that is incomplete, explains Vermorel.
“Tokeda addresses both the challenge of viably preserving an unbounded amount of metadata without endangering Bitcoin itself and the challenge of introducing tokens within Bitcoin by weaving the two problems through aligned economic incentives,” explains Vermorel’s paper.
Tokeda is compatible with stateless wallets (which include SPV wallets) and requires no consensus change. As a token scheme, Tokeda relies on a trust-but-verify security model centered around the issuer.
Vermorel believes the BCH community needs to learn from the scaling issues the Ethereum network faces by making tokenization simpler.
“Since, it is now clear that tokenization does not require a change of the base protocol, it’s up to the market to deliver solutions, based on Tokeda, or anything deemed superior,” Vermorel details. “If there is one lesson to be learned from ETH it’s violating the locality principle in your design kills the scalability.”
A Matter of Opinion and the Benefits of a Universal Method that Creates Permissionless Tokens
Many others have stated their opinions concerning Stone’s Group proposal and Vermorel’s Tokeda. Following Stone’s published paper, Jonald Fyookball revealed some of his subjective valuations in a paper called ‘Thoughts on Tokens for BCH.’
“Whether or not we should change the BCH protocol to add GROUP is a risk/reward question and a matter of opinion,” Fyookball states. “Part of what made ERC20 so successful is how easy it is for anyone to create and issue a token, and for the ecosystem to support it. The BCH protocol already allows colored coins but no one uses it because the ecosystem doesn’t support it.”
In any case, I believe BCH would greatly benefit from a universal method for doing SPV-friendly, permissionless tokens.
What do you think about the Group proposal described by BU’s Andrew Stone? What do you think about other ideas like Joannes Vermorel’s Tokeda? Let us know your thoughts on this subject in the comment section below.
Images via Shutterstock, Pixabay, and Youtube.
Want to create your own secure cold storage paper wallet? Check our tools section.
The post Group or Tokeda? A Look at the BCH Color Coin Debate appeared first on Bitcoin News.
An EU summit long planned to focus on the bloc’s patchy asylum policies has assumed unexpected urgency.
WSJ.com: What’s News Europe
“Bitcoin, or a similar form of cryptocurrency, will eventually replace governments’ fiat money as the preferred medium of exchange” was the resolution for a rollicking debate between Shapeshift CEO Erik Voorhees (affirmative) and Euro Pacific Capital Inc CEO Peter Schiff, prominent cryptocurrency skeptic (negative). In a victory for the crypto community at large, Mr. Voorhees was judged the winner by audience vote, moving 15% of the assembled crowd to support the resolution; Mr. Schiff managed to actually lose his base support by the end of the night, having been thoroughly beaten. The winner earned bragging rights and the traditional Tootsie Roll.
Erik Voorhees Vanquishes Peter Schiff at Sold Out New York Bitcoin Debate
New York City’s gritty, famed Bowery district is home to the recently reconfigured Soho Forum. Functioning as a debate society, it is hosted by the affable and nebbish Gene Epstein, economics editor of Barron’s. The Soho Forum featured Bitcoin pioneer Erik Voorhees and well known conservative/libertarian-ish economic media personality Peter Schiff.
The sold out, standing-room only audience at the Subculture Theater was treated to a good old donnybrook, a philosophical fisticuffs, lasting a full hour and a half (including audience questions). Sans necktie, wearing a light-colored suit, Mr. Voorhees argued in favor of the resolution, defending the idea of crypto finally usurping fiat hegemony. Mr. Schiff, in a muted royal blue suit with yellow tie, met his challenger to express intense incredulity that magic internet money beans could be anything more than a faddish bubble.
After brief introductions by Mr. Epstein, Lincoln-Douglas format demands the affirmative position make its case. Mr. Voorhees appealed the crowd’s natural bias immediately by reminding them of his infamous tangles regarding the state’s odious Bitlicense affair. He cheekily asked a future Forum debate be held on which is now more socialist, China or New York. He also paid homage to his night’s sparring partner, Mr. Schiff, in that the bearded gold bug’s podcast, as far back as 2008, was an influential factor in Mr. Voorhees’ embracing of free markets.
Mr. Voorhees argued four main points: why bitcoin is good money, why fiat is bad money, why gold is insufficient, and lastly why bitcoin will win. Most of the arguments, it might be fair to say, veterans in the space have heard. Bitcoin’s being provably scarce, its immutability, its near infinite divisibility, its durability with regard to the vast network of computing power, worldwide, at its disposal. Anticipating Mr. Schiff’s reliably arguing in favor of gold, Mr. Voorhees was keen to contrast bitcoin’s many advantages over the ancient metal, including debasement and counterfeit issues (bitcoin can’t be filled with tungsten, for example).
Peter Schiff’s Valiant Effort Falls Very Flat
Peter Schiff came to prominence during the 2008 Great Recession, having ‘predicted’ – his word – the real estate bubble and subsequent crash (he claims same of the dot com shake out). His viral videos of braving Occupy Wall Street urchins, toe to toe, made for compelling viewing. Tonight, however, he was the Mr. Schiff who just cannot see his way to accepting crypto as anything near legitimate. The resolution somewhat pigeon-holed him as essentially arguing in favor of fiat, but, of course, everyone who knows knows Mr. Schiff is hardly a fan.
Mr. Schiff made the oft-stated claim few, it seems, were actually ‘in’ to cryptocurrencies for the tech or even their potential as mediums of exchange. They are, he stated flatly, taking a financial position out of pure greed. Its being a speculation play was an enormous strike against it. And, even still, if folks wanted to use the decentralized money, they were hard pressed. Furthermore it’s not even a store of value, having slid some 60 percent since the end of last year, and its present volatility isn’t any better, he ventured.
He acknowledged how the “fiat system that we have now is not going to work, but replacing fiat currency with a digital fiat currency is not an improvement” either. Gold was the case Mr. Schiff came to make, his reliable go-to in every debate. The mere fact of gold having been around for centuries was proof enough bitcoin is no match. He asked rhetorically, “What are the odds that bitcoin’s the best cryptocurrency that’s ever going to be invented?” Gold, he maintained, has never been improved upon.
In the end, the men settled on some agreement: governments can outlaw bitcoin, something gold has been able to function reasonably well under; bitcoin might very well not be the final crypto standing; most people find comfort in government-issued money. Mr. Voorhees’ counter that bitcoin’s utility in areas of remittances, cross-border nature, being deflationary and censorship resistant carried the day. Audience polling prior to the debate had Mr. Voorhees’ and Mr. Schiff’s positions at 40% approval each. The debate formally terminated when it was announced Mr. Voorhees gained a whopping 15% of the voting audience to his side (55%) while Mr. Schiff’s support plunged to just 31%. After, the victorious Mr. Voorhees and friend, and equally important ecosystem pioneer, Nic Cary, dined with Peter Schiff, and were able to fashion him with a first bitcoin transaction.
Are debates an important way to educate about crypto? Let us know in the comments.
Images via the Pixabay, Twitter.
Verify and track bitcoin cash transactions on our BCH Block Explorer, the best of its kind anywhere in the world. Also, keep up with your holdings, BCH and other coins, on our market charts at Satoshi Pulse, another original and free service from Bitcoin.com.
The post Shapeshift CEO Defeats Peter Schiff in Bitcoin Debate appeared first on Bitcoin News.