What would matter about bitcoin and cryptocurrencies would be the blockchain, according to the economist.
Redrado considers bitcoin as “speculative asset only for experienced investors”.
The former president of the Central Bank of Argentina (BCRA), Martin Redrado, days ago published a tweet that caused numerous responses from users and scholars of Bitcoin (BTC). In his publication he made reference to the first cryptocurrency, but also to Ethereum and blockchains.
“Attention that the technology (blockchain) that underpins the cryptocurrency Ethereum, [is] outperforming bitcoin. This is the key differentiating factor going forward,” the economist wrote on September 4.
Thus, the politician who headed the BCRA between 2004 and 2010, repeated a narrative that was prevalent years ago: that what matters is not so much bitcoin but blockchains as a unitary technology. In particular, Redrado referred to Ethereum, a network described by its creator, Vitalik Buterin, as a “general-purpose blockchain”.
In response, who headed the BCRA during much of the governments of Néstor and Cristina Kirchner, received messages from several bitcoiners.
For Franco Amati, one of the founders of the NGO Bitcoin Argentina, “blockchain yes, Bitcoin no”, is a message that “is at least 3 years overdue”. This is not the first time the developer has expressed himself in similar terms. CryptoNews reported that, in 2018, he had said that we should “stop using the word ‘blockchain'” and refer directly to the purpose of the project.
Ethereum is “more centralized than the FBI,” one bitcoiner responds
Other criticisms that Redrado received for his tweet, were for his assessment of Ethereum. For example, for finance specialist Adam Dubove, Redrado’s conclusion that Ethereum is superior to Bitcoin is “logical for a central banker.” “He’s more comfortable with Proof of Stake (PoS) because it emulates a system he already knows and would allow him to control it. Bitcoin, no,” he explained.
PoS, or “Proof of Stake,” which Ethereum will adopt when version 2.0 of the network goes live, will eliminate the need for the mining (proof-of-work, PoW), i.e. the use of advanced computational resources and high power consumption to validate transactions and issue new coins.
Specifically about Ethereum, Dubove wrote, as a response in the thread that was started by Redrado’s comment, that it is “more centralized than the FBI” and that, comparing it to Bitcoin is “comparing apples and pears.”
As Dubove has explained on other occasions, “every aspect of Bitcoin’s design is driven by security, decentralization and incentives. In contrast, he sees other cryptocurrencies, whose founders or some centralized entity has great influence on the project, as highly vulnerable to attack:
Companies or foundations that run other supposedly decentralized projects are a perfect target for sovereign states to attack those protocols, something we’re already seeing these days. And, if the idea is to separate money from the state, being vulnerable to one of these attacks is not a very good idea.
Adam Dubove, finance specialist and director of Ichimoku Fibonacci.
“The social revolution is bigger than the technological revolution.”
Also responded to the politician, the Argentine engineer and member of the NGO Bitcoin Argentina, Julian Drangosch. For him, Redrado is wrong for not understanding that “the social revolution is much bigger than the technological revolution”. In that sense, according to the bitcoiner, “Bitcoin far exceeds all altcoins”.
Drangosch was interviewed a few days ago by CryptoNews regarding Bitcoin mining. On that occasion, the engineer and also a teacher had opined that “there is no need for blockchains with other synchronization mechanisms such as Proof of Stake”. According to him, “it is not that blockchain is the important thing and then we have to make PoW more efficient and that is why we change the synchronization mechanism to PoS”.
On the contrary, he believes that “the real invention is the proof of work (of Adam Back in hashcash) and that’s what we need in the world and blockchain is the way to transmit it”.
Redrado vs. bitcoiners: a Twitter classic
It is not the first time that Argentine bitcoiners have clashes with Redrado via Twitter. On several occasions he described the crypto-asset as something only useful for
to experienced investors due to its high volatility.
Redrado considers BTC a “speculative asset, only for experienced investors”. Source: Twitter.
Also, in February 2020, the economist had suggested the need to create a digital peso
and several supporters of BTC reproached him that his intention was the monitoring by the State of the financial movements of citizens.
It provoked the repudiation of many, on that occasion, that Redrado put China as an example to follow. The Asian country, which has been under a communist dictatorship since 1949, is not exactly known for its citizens’ freedoms. Currently, China is in the final stage of testing for the launch of its digital currency, the e-yuan, which will function as a large database held by the state.