Ripple technical director David Schwartz again Dr. Lectured by Craig Wright

Bitcoin inventor Dr. The heated Twitter debate between Craig Wright and Ripple CTO David Schwartz is far from over. We have passed the first round and the next round is already in full swing.

Schwartz He mentioned the Introduction of Bitcoin white paper and highlighted some sentences:

Bitcoin is a commercial system

This tweet of Schwartz’s Dr. was the answer to Wright, and he, as Satoshi Nakamoto, never mentioned that Bitcoin was out of the hands of governments.

Let’s see: do the transitions highlighted by Schwartz have anything to do with Bitcoin being out of the hands of governments? Every referenced passage of the white paper begins with the word “trade.”

About the presentation of the Bitcoin white paper trade. Not about governments. In another tweet, Schwartz suggests that his understanding is one interpretation of the words – as he claimed, was not literally mentioned in the introduction to the Bitcoin white paper:

So we’re now discussing Schwartz’s comment, not what the Introduction to the Bitcoin white paper actually says. We get Schwartz’s point. It says it will need financial transactions that can be repaid by governments trust in governments.

Note: Schwartz refers to “trusted third parties,” Dr. Wright explains that not all reliable parties are trusted. the third parties:

What does Dr. Wright mean by the distinction between “trusted parties” and “trusted third parties”?

Bitcoin is not a secure system. With Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto solved the puzzle of electronic money. Part of this puzzle was the problem anonymous observers in payment systems that cannot be trusted due to their anonymity.

In Bitcoin, nodes are observers but are anonymized by economic incentives. So we still have valid sides in Bitcoin. However, they are not the third parties. They are inside The Bitcoin network is no exception.

Dr. Wright explained it this way in his article Solving Double Spending:

As a result, bitcoin was designed as an economically tradable token. Based on an economic process whose security involves individuals working to validate transactions – when tokens are paid – a commercial system can be built where economically motivated nodes compete to validate solutions by anonymizing such observer systems.

Again, commercial system. It has nothing to do with governments. It doesn’t say anything for or against governments – it’s just about trade. This is why Satoshi Nakamoto actually referred to the banking system because the banking system is part of the commercial system.

Ripple’s CTO Schwartz interprets the Bitcoin white paper instead of understanding the details of Bitcoin as a solution to the electronic money puzzle. Dr. In Wright’s article Solving Double Spending, Schwartz can trace the academic history of digital money systems that have been discussed since at least 1994.

Satoshi Nakamoto didn’t suddenly wake up with the idea of ​​Bitcoin – quite the opposite actually happened. This was the result of an academic approach to the electronic money debate.

Bitcoin is not against governments; not even against the banks!

We noted that Bitcoin as a technology is not and cannot be a solution to political problems. See what happened with the Canadian truck protests and Bitcoin.

No, Satoshi Nakamoto didn’t say that.

Schwartz clearly doesn’t trust governments, I understand. History books give a brief account of what governments are capable of. But show me the technology that solves the problems with governments.

Governments can adapt to any technology, so go digital. If you want to change governments, maybe don’t refer to the Bitcoin white paper, because you wouldn’t refer to the PayPal (NASDAQ: PYPL ) terms of service to vote in a new government either. Technology, politics – words have meaning.

In addition, when it comes to Bitcoin, governments do not trust third parties. They are not even trusted parties in Bitcoin. Simply because governments are not primarily created to be participants in trade, but to ensure the legal conditions of trade (as in a free market).

Additional Information:

Bitcoin was made for you and me, not for crime or to overthrow the government

Is Ripple CTO David Schwartz ‘for the truth’?

I think Ripple’s business model is about settlements, right? However, I’m not sure Ripple CTO David Schwartz understands what cash is. Bitcoin is complex cash. Bitcoin solves payments at a low cost with privacy at scale.

No one said Bitcoin was easy to understand. Maybe David Schwartz is trying to figure this out, but I can tell he doesn’t want to dig deep enough. Dr. Wright is literally giving away free educational courses through his tweets.

But it is more convenient to just comment instead of learning something. Therefore, Dr. Tweets between Wright and Schwartz go back and forth to no avail. One of them reads, and the other defends his personal interpretation.

what is science Finding the truth. What is an interpretation? Claiming the truth.

width=”560″ height=”315″ frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=”allowfullscreen”>

See: How Bitcoin Works as a Base Layer for Other Blockchains

width=”560″ height=”315″ frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=”allowfullscreen”>

New to Bitcoin? Check out CoinGeek Bitcoin for beginners The section is the ultimate resource guide for learning more about Bitcoin and blockchain as envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto.

Source link