Tone Vays Debates Justin Bons and BCH in Amsterdam

bitcoin-debate-tin-bons-story

Last weekend saw another Bitcoin debate play out in Amsterdam at a Cyber.Capital sponsored meetup hosted by Blockchain Talks. The topic was Bitcoin Cash BCH and Bitcoin Core BTC.

Justin Bons, Investment Strategist and Co-Founder of Cyber Capital, represented the Bitcoin-as-cash BCH side while Tone Vays, BTC Supremacist and technical analysis guru, represented the BTC/Lightning Network/”Store of Value” side.

Watch the full talk here:

The debate was structured with each participant taking turns making arguments for their respective sides and then getting time for rebuttals.

After winning a coin toss, Tone deferred to Justin and asked that he go first. Here is a summary of the BCH side’s opening statement.

Bons’ Overview: BCH is superior to BTC and does everything the latter does and more.

  1. BCH is superior to BTC in terms of the goal of achieving the best censorship-resistant, peer-to-peer electronic cash system.
  2. BTC is limiting itself in trying and failing to be “digital gold”, a purely speculative asset with no underlying utility as money.
  3. BCH can achieve being medium of exchange—cash, and eventually a store of value or “digital gold”. This gives it a stronger value proposition since more use cases create more utility which creates actual value. All of this increases the security and thus decentralization of the cash version of Bitcoin, BCH.
  4. BTC is fundamentally flawed. Over time, the original model of p2p cash has been eroded and the fundamental economic and governance design has changed for the worse.
  5. Bitcoin inflation via the block reward is what incentivizes mining. This will eventually run out and so transaction fees will need to incentivize mining. BTC aims to be a low volume, high fee network while BCH proposes to be a high volume, low fee network.
  6. At current scale, BTC fees rise to at least $50 when the network is full. The high cost for this level of security is not viable when competitors like BCH exist which do everything BTC does, for less than a penny per transaction.
  7. The slow transaction time and the high fee experience on BTC hurts users adoption since it is impossible to pick the appropriate fee for most users.
  8. Meanwhile, BCH merchants can receive the cryptocurrency in seconds for virtually nothing in fees on their personal smartphone wallets.
  9. It is superfluous for people in the developing world to run “full-nodes” for BTC when they cannot even afford to use the network for transacting.

Vays’ Overview: BTC can only scale on a “second-layer”.

  1. Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin in 2008. At first it didn’t have value. Now it has a lot of value.
  2. BTC has three fundamental properties that give it value: it is unconfiscateable, it is censorship-resistant value transfer, and it has an unchangeable monetary policy.
  3. Satoshi chose a “gold-style” monetary policy with a finite supply.
  4. There is nothing from Satoshi to imply that bitcoin is free, that it is instant, or that it is private.
  5. How do we scale Bitcoin? How do we make it as private and cheap as possible without compromising the three fundamental principles?
  6. Only BTC matters since if people save on another chain then they might eventually move to another blockchain and another and another.
  7. Scaling needs to be on “the second layer” because if you try to scale the first layer, you endanger the critical properties of Bitcoin.
  8. Satoshi purposefully set the max block size to 1mb.
  9. It’s impossible to raise the max block size of Bitcoin because it will cause a split.
  10. Bitcoin will scale on a second-layer and “it will be amazing”.

The debate heats up from there as they continue with the rebuttals.

Watch the full video to see the rest and decide for yourself.