The Blockchain Debate Podcast

Guests:
CasPiancey (@caspiancey)
Matthew Graham (@mattysino)
Host:
Richard Yan (@gentso09)

Today’s motion is “Tether will likely get crushed by authorities in the next two years, thanks to its shady practices and defiance against regulators.”
In this debate about the controversial pioneer stablecoin, we talked about pending lawsuits, a lack of regulatory framework for Tether to work with from the outset that cornered them into the way things are for them, how Tether issuance is affecting bitcoin prices, why Tether dominates stablecoin market cap despite its troubles, and more.
Today’s debaters include CasPiancey, a long-time and vocal Tether skeptic; and Matthew Graham, the founder of a well-known Asia-based crypto fund.
If you’re into crypto and like to hear two sides of the story, be sure to also check out our previous episodes. We’ve featured some of the best known thinkers in the crypto space.
If you would like to debate or want to nominate someone, please DM me at @blockdebate on Twitter.
Please note that nothing in our podcast should be construed as financial advice.
I hope you will enjoy listening to this debate. Let’s dive right in!
Source of select items discussed in the debate (and supplemental material):

• UT Austin paper suggesting correlation between Bitcoin price and Tether issuance: https://archive.is/fMboo
• Paper #1 showing no correlation between Bitcoin price and Tether issuance: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3508006
• Paper #2 showing no correlation between Bitcoin price and Tether issuance: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165176518302556
• New York Attorney General case against Tether: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ny-attorney-general-sues-bitfinex-210643545.html
• Tether lawsuit from crypto traders: https://www.coindesk.com/crypto-traders-lawsuit-claims-bitfinex-tether-cost-market-over-1-trillion

Debater bios:
CasPiancey is an independent investigator and reporter of business and financial fraud. He writes regularly about projects, exchanges and scams in crypto.
Matthew is CEO of Sino Global Capital. He has seven years of mainland China investment banking experience with a focus on representing international technology companies in China for strategic partnership and investment. Matthew has been involved in blockchain since 2013, first slowly, then all at once. As Managing Partner of Sino Global's Liquid Value blockchain fund Mr. Graham invests in blockchain technology with strategic relevance for China. Significant 2020 investments include primary market deals such as FTX, Serum, Mintbase, Mask Network; and secondary market deals such as Solana and Nexus Mutual.

Guests:
Lewis Cohen (@NYcryptolawyer)
Gabriel Shapiro (@lex_node)
Host:
Richard Yan (@gentso09)

Today’s motion is “Legally speaking, tokens are more like commodities than like securities.”
Today’s guests are two legal experts in crypto space. One of them will argue that token transactions on the post-ICO, secondary market should for the most part be regulated like commodities and not securities. He will argue that the tokens changing hands in said capital markets do not themselves represent securities, because they don’t capture the same rights as conferred in the primary transaction. He laid out his thoughts in the paper “Ain’t Misbehavin’: An Examination of Broadway Tickets and Blockchain Tokens,” which will be included in the show notes.
And of course, the other guest vehemently disagrees on this point.
Throughout the debate, we also cover the SEC vs Kik case and Ripple’s security status.
If you’re into crypto and like to hear two sides of the story, be sure to also check out our previous episodes. We’ve featured some of the best known thinkers in the crypto space.
If you would like to debate or want to nominate someone, please DM me at @blockdebate on Twitter.
Please note that nothing in our podcast should be construed as financial advice.
Source of select items discussed in the debate (and supplemental material):

• Lewis Cohen's paper: "Ain’t Misbehavin’: An Examination of Broadway Tickets and Blockchain Tokens": https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3501764
• SEC vs XRP: https://www.coindesk.com/xrp-untradeable-sec-security
• SEC vs Kik: https://www.coindesk.com/kik-sec-ruling
• Lewis Cohen: https://dlxlaw.com/who-we-are
• Gabe Shapiro blog: https://lex-node.medium.com/

Debater bios:
Lewis is co-founder of the New York based DLX law firm. His main focus is blockchain, tokenization, and other new capital raising techniques and structures. He was previously a partner at two of the Global 25 law firms, and his practices included securitization and other complex structured financings.
Gabe is partner of the San Francisco based law firm Belcher, Smolen & Van Loo LLP. He has published several pieces diving deep into US Securities Law, in which he shares his vision and philosophy for how Tokenized Networks should be regulated. His specialty also includes M&A transactions for high tech corporate clients.

Guests:
Kevin Sekniqi (@kevinsekniqi) - debating FOR the motion
Tarun Chitra (@tarunchitra) - debating AGAINST the motion
Host:
Richard Yan (@gentso09)
Today’s motion is “POS will overtake POW.”
This is an important topic for a few reasons. First, from an investor’s perspective, this is another angle of evaluating BTC vs its challengers, which by and large are POS, or moving to POS. Second, this provides guidance to architects of new protocols in making design decisions.
If we were to measure the dominance of POW via market cap, of the top 20 coins on CMC, coins with a POW mechanism (with no serious plans to migrate to something else), take up 74% of the share of market cap.
The two guests we have for this episode are: a builder of a highly anticipated POS-based protocol; and a creator of an extremely interesting business that simulates protocol behavior, to help protocol designers make more sound decisions.
I want to note that, about 70 minutes into the debate, the discussion shifted to a general conversation about money characteristics of bitcoin, and this goes on for about 25 minutes. This was not directly relevant to the motion, but I kept it in nonetheless, for the insights it shed.
Make sure to check out our previous episodes too, on Bitcoin’s store of value status, tokenization and smart contracts, DeFi, bitcoin halvening, and China’s future in blockchain.
If you would like to debate or want to nominate someone, please DM me at @blockdebate.
Please note that nothing in our podcast should be construed as financial advice.
Source of select items discussed in the debate:

• Paul Sztorc article "Nothing is Cheaper than Proof of Work": http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/
• Hash rate derivatives: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-crypto-currencies-derivatives/with-hashes-and-hedges-power-hungry-crypto-miners-court-investors-idUSKBN1YE0KA
• Digital currency as a Veblen good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

Guests:
Yves Bennaïm: twitter.com/ZLOKGeorge Selgin: twitter.com/georgeselgin

Host:
Richard Yan (twitter.com/gentso09)

Today’s motion is “It's a bad idea to make Bitcoin compulsory tender.”
If you’re somewhat into crypto, you must have heard about El Salvador’s Bitcoin Law that has made Bitcoin a legal tender in addition to USD. With an asterisk. Dictionary definition of legal tender says a legal tender is a money that must be accepted if offered in payment of a debt. But El Salvador goes one step further, and says not only do lenders have to accept payment in bitcoin, but merchants that provide products and services must also. This is why the motion uses the term compulsory tender instead of legal tender.
The two debaters today will discuss what all this means. One of them will argue why this is not in line with bitcoin’s values and why this may even hurt bitcoin’s adoption. The other will argue that adoption of a new money necessitates such coercion, and this will give the little guys the same kind of opportunity as sophisticated financiers in getting involved with bitcoin.
If you’re into crypto and like to hear two sides of the story, be sure to also check out our previous episodes. We’ve featured some of the best known thinkers in the crypto space.
If you would like to debate or want to nominate someone, please DM me at @blockdebate on Twitter.
Please note that nothing in our podcast should be construed as financial advice.
Source of select items discussed in the debate (and supplemental material):

• Full text of El Salvador Bitcoin Law (3-minute read): https://freopp.org/el-salvadors-bitcoin-law-full-proposed-english-text-9a2153ad1d19
• Bitcoin Beach in El Salvador: https://www.bitcoinbeach.com/
• How the community custodial wallet works on Bitcoin Beach, explained in another podcast: https://stephanlivera.com/episode/279/
• Explanation of how Strike uses a private instance of the Lightning Network: https://twitter.com/AdrianoFeria/status/1411344200390557701

Guest bios:
George Selgin is a senior fellow and director of the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at the Cato Institute and professor emeritus of economics at the University of Georgia.
Yves is the founder of 2B4CH, a Bitcoin Think Tank and Industry Advocacy Group in Switzerland. He also writes about Bitcoin and crypto for the Swiss business magazine Bilan as well as the daily Swiss newspaper Le Temps.

• DAOs related to Synthetix: https://decrypt.co/37011/synthetix-is-now-controlled-by-three-daos
• Edmund Schuster's paper on smart contracts: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3476678
• Wyoming DAO law: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/04/22/state-lawmaker-explains-wyomings-newly-passed-dao-llc-law/