Barcelona

Most blockchain advocates haven’t even used Bitcoin

Bitcoin, the original blockchain, struggles to gain traction among blockchain advocates; an opinion from one of Europe’s largest blockchain conferences.

Bitcoin (BTC) popularised the term blockchain. Blockchains, or “decentralized and distributed digital ledgers used to record transactions across a network of computers,” have been around for over thirty years, the household name for a blockchain is Bitcoin. 

That’s despite the fact that the Genesis block was mined well over 14 years ago when George W. Bush was president and “I Gotta Feeling” by Black Eyed Peas topped the charts–Bitcoin is still top of the blocks.

It’s to be expected, then, that most blockchain advocates would have used, understood or a the very least experimented with Bitcoin.

Nope. Not so.

Speaking with Victoria Gago, co-founder of the European Blockchain Conference. Source: José Val Bal

Here’s an example. While MC’ing at the European Blockchain Conference in February, I asked the audience for a show of hands. I inquired of the circa 250 blockchain believers sitting in front of me:

“Who here has used Bitcoin?”

Maybe 20 audience hands shot up. “Okay. Keep your hand up if you’ve used Bitcoin’s Lightning Network,” I said. The Lightning Network or (LN) is the payments network built on top of Bitcoin which allows near-instant, near-free transactions. Over half those hands went down.

One data sample is insufficient. So, the following day I quizzed the audience on stage. I was surprised to receive the same result. Four-fifths of the blockchain conference audience had never used Bitcoin.

Why is that? Why is it that so few people have touched arguably the only blockchain that solves what is known as the “scalability trilemma;” that of decentralization, security and scalability?

The Bitcoin blockchain, or timechain as Satoshi Nakamoto called it in the white paper, is still relatively small. Anyone with an old laptop can download the entirety of all transactions in order to run a node; the network can scale to reach millions and soon billions of people with layers, while the Bitcoin blockchain has never been hacked. And yet at the blockchain conference, very few attendees run nodes or have transacted on Bitcoin.

However, there are not enough data points to yet form this conclusion. I wanted to quiz individuals across the conference if they were blockchainers or Bitcoiners–and if so, why is that the case?

I quizzed conference-goers about a simple question. I asked around 15 conference goers to choose Web3 or Web5, and only one person of the fifteen chose Web5. Ironically, the sole Web5 proponent in the interview is Bitcoiner Antonia Roupell, whose job title is “Web3 lead” for Save the Children.

Most respondents looked confused when presented with the choice of webs. “What is Web5?” They queried.

Web3 is a world of reportedly decentralized blockchains in which tokens (and token sales) drive the economy forward; Web5 is the decentralized internet built on Bitcoin. Naturally, Bitcoin maximalist Jack Dorsey champions Web5. 

Dorsey explained in December 2021 that Web5 will allow true ownership of identity and data, unlike Web3. Dorsey explains that “Web3″ has the “Same corporate incentives [as Twitter] but hides it under “decentralization.”

The Twitter founder reckons Web3 will never achieve true decentralization as underneath the marketing spiel and tokenomics it’s the venture capitalists and limited Partners who own the blockchains and the data underpinning the systems.

Web5 already boasts social media applications such as Zion in which users can easily send Bitcoin to one another and own their data, built atop one decentralized blockchain and. Which blockchain? You guessed it, Bitcoin. 

Source: areweweb5yet.com

Web3 has existed since Ethereum coder Gavin Wood coined the term in 2014 and thus has more time on its side. Plus it’s a catchy, catch-all term that is often used interchangeably with blockchain, crypto and metaverse. It’s hard to define, underline or frame without referring to financially lucrative projects. 

It finally struck me that the focus of most attendees at the European Blockchain Convention was business over Bitcoin. Or to put it another way–and to attempt to be a little less naive–the attendees wanted to make money over work towards a new monetary policy.

Moderating a panel on Web3 during the conference. Source: José Val Bal

I had the same experience when discussing Nostr, which stands for Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays. The relatively new, decentralized network enables private messaging and uncensorable communication–among other projects. 

One of the applications of Nostr, called iPhone app Damus, helped Nostr reach nearly half a million daily users in mid-February. User count multiplied by 5 since its listing on the Apple iOS store and the protocol is full of Bitcoin advocates.

I asked conference attendees for their public key so I could follow them on Nostr. I was met with bemused looks. The blockchain believers and champions of decentralized protocols had not tested nor heard of Damus.

Nostr explained by nostr.com

Do you want one more example?

An employee at a popular Bitcoin company–who I won’t dox in this opinion piece–approached me during the conference. “I saw you sending sats to people on stage. You sound like a [Bitcoin] maxi,” he joked. 

“Guilty, officer” I joked. I only hold Bitcoin and am passionate about bringing Bitcoin to the world, especially those living in financially kneecapped countries.

“You would probably recognize the company I represent then. I work for Blockstream.”

Of course! I told him. I actually played Jenga in the park with Blockstream’s CEO, Adam Back, recently. We immediately bonded.

Related: Regulation stole the show at Barcelona’s European Blockchain Convention

The Blockstream employee confided in me that not a single conferencegoer had clocked his employer. Blockstream is a well-known Bitcoin companies. Blockstream pioneers lightning adoption, side chains, affordable hardware wallets and liquid, while Back was one of the few names mentioned in the Bitcoin white paper published in 2008.

He shared his surprise with me, but it was 5pm on the last day of the conference–by this point I understood. “It’s a Bitcoin company, mate” I explained. And after all, “Bitcoin and blockchain don’t really mix.” Bitcoin has a marketing problem, I said.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Most blockchain advocates haven‘t even used Bitcoin

Bitcoin, the original blockchain, struggles to gain traction among blockchain advocates — an opinion from one of Europe’s largest blockchain conferences.

Bitcoin (BTC) popularised the term blockchain. While blockchains, or decentralized and distributed digital ledgers used to record transactions across a network of computers, have been around for over 30 years, Bitcoin is the household name for a blockchain. 

That’s despite the fact that the genesis block was mined well over 14 years ago, when George W. Bush was president of the United States and “I Gotta Feeling” by the Black Eyed Peas topped the charts. Bitcoin, however, is still top of the blocks.

It’s to be expected, then, that most blockchain advocates have used, understood or — at the very least — experimented with Bitcoin.

Nope. Not so.

Speaking with Victoria Gago, co-founder of the European Blockchain Convention. Source: José Val Bal

Here’s an example. While emceeing at the European Blockchain Convention in February, I asked the roughly 250 blockchain believers sitting in front of me in the audience for a show of hands:

“Who here has used Bitcoin?”

Maybe 20 hands in the audience shot up. “Okay. Keep your hand up if you’ve used Bitcoin’s Lightning Network,” I said. The Lightning Network is a payments network built on top of Bitcoin that allows near-instant, near-free transactions. Over half those hands went down.

One data sample is insufficient. So, the following day, I asked the audience on stage. I was surprised to receive the same result. Four-fifths of the blockchain conference audience had never used Bitcoin.

Why is that? Why is it that so few people have touched arguably the only blockchain that solves what is known as the “scalability trilemma” — that of decentralization, security and scalability?

The Bitcoin blockchain — or “timechain,” as Satoshi Nakamoto called it in the Bitcoin white paper — is still relatively small. Anyone with an old laptop can download the entirety of transactions in order to run a node. The network can scale to reach millions and soon billions of people with layers, and the Bitcoin blockchain has never been hacked. And yet at the blockchain conference, very few attendees said they run nodes or have transacted on Bitcoin.

However, there are not enough data points yet to form this conclusion. I wanted to quiz individuals across the conference to see if they were blockchainers or Bitcoiners — and if so, why was that the case?

I quizzed conference-goers with a simple question. I asked around 15 people to choose Web3 or Web5, and only one person chose Web5. Ironically, the sole Web5 proponent was Bitcoiner Antonia Roupell, whose job title is “Web3 lead” for Save the Children.

Most respondents looked confused when presented with the choice of webs. “What is Web5?” hey queried.

Web3 is a world of reportedly decentralized blockchains in which tokens (and token sales) drive the economy forward, while Web5 is the decentralized internet built on Bitcoin. Naturally, Bitcoin maximalist Jack Dorsey champions Web5. 

Dorsey explained in December 2021 that Web5 would allow true ownership of identity and data, unlike Web3. He highlighted that “Web3” has the “same corporate incentives [as Twitter] but hides it under ‘decentralization.’”

The Twitter founder reckons Web3 will never achieve true decentralization, as underneath the marketing spiel and tokenomics, it’s the venture capitalists and limited partners who own the blockchains and the data underpinning the systems.

Web5 already boasts social media applications such as Zion in which users can easily send BTC to one another and own their data, built atop one decentralized blockchain. Which blockchain? You guessed it, Bitcoin. 

Source: Are We Web5 Yet?

Web3 has existed since Ethereum coder Gavin Wood coined the term in 2014 and thus has more time on its side. Plus, it’s a catchy, catch-all term that is often used interchangeably with blockchain, crypto and the metaverse. It’s hard to define, underline or frame without referring to financially lucrative projects. 

It finally struck me that the focus of most attendees at the European Blockchain Convention was business over Bitcoin. Or to put it another way — and to attempt to be a little less naive — the attendees wanted to make money over working toward a new monetary policy.

Moderating a panel on Web3 during the conference. Source: José Val Bal

I had the same experience when discussing Nostr, which stands for Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays. The relatively new decentralized network enables private messaging and uncensorable communication, among other projects. 

One of the applications of Nostr, the iPhone app Damus, helped Nostr reach nearly half a million daily users in mid-February. Its user count has multiplied by five since its listing on the Apple iOS store, and the protocol is full of Bitcoin advocates.

I asked conference attendees for their public key so I could follow them on Nostr. I was met with bemused looks. The blockchain believers and champions of decentralized protocols had not tested nor heard of Damus.

Nostr, as explained by Nostr.

Do you want one more example?

An employee at a popular Bitcoin company (who I won’t dox in this opinion piece) approached me during the conference. “I saw you sending sats to people on stage. You sound like a [Bitcoin] maxi,” he joked. 

“Guilty, officer,” I joked. I only hold BTC and am passionate about bringing i to the world, especially those living in financially kneecapped countries.

“You would probably recognize the company I represent then. I work for Blockstream.”

“Of course!” I told him. I actually played Jenga in the park with Blockstream’s CEO, Adam Back, recently. We immediately bonded.

Related: Regulation stole the show at Barcelona’s European Blockchain Convention

The Blockstream employee confided in me that not a single conferencegoer had clocked his employer. Blockstream is a well-known Bitcoin company that pioneers Lightning adoption, sidechains, affordable hardware wallets and Liquid, and Back is one of the few names mentioned in the Bitcoin white paper published in 2008.

He shared his surprise with me, but it was 5:00 pm on the last day of the conference — by this point, I understood. “It’s a Bitcoin company, mate,” I explained. And after all, “Bitcoin and blockchain don’t really mix.” “Bitcoin has a marketing problem,” I said.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Regulation stole the show at Barcelona’s European Blockchain Convention

Across numerous panels, fireside chats and on stage discussions the word regulation rang out at Barcelona’s 4th European Blockchain Convention.

Some 2,500 crypto-curious blockchain believers descended on Barcelona’s Hyatt Tower conference suites last week in a networking bonanza. The 8th edition of the European Blockchain Convention, and the fourth occurrence in Barcelona, also coincided with Bitcoin (BTC) sitting tight below $25,000.

Despite an over 60% crypto drawdown, the conference was packed, and reportedly 2,500 attendees from banks, blockchain companies and crypto drank in the sights and sounds of the cosmopolitan capital of Spain’s Catalonia region. Nonetheless, the crypto scars of 2022 are still tender and raw; many attendees raised real concerns about regulation and rules. 

Cointelegraph’s Hall speaks to EBC cofounder Victoria Gago. Source: José Val Bal

Among the clarion calls for regulation were bankers from major European institutions: Santander, HSBC and Société Générale shared stages and rubbed shoulders with crypto natives and blockchain maximalists.

However, contrary to expectation, it was the crypto-native camp that was quick to recognize the issues of 2022 and who was first to call for clearer instruction from regulators.

Stef Wynendaele, a crypto native who heads up commercial strategy for KeyRock, told Cointelegraph that he’s “wildly in love with Bitcoin,” and that “questioning the establishment” is an important tenet to crypto. That said, a collaborative environment between institutions and disruptors may be the most productive path forward:

“Everybody says, ‘We don’t want to talk with the banks, we don’t want to know what they’re doing, etc.’ But they’ve actually been around for 300 or 400 years. They have a lot of experience on how to do things actually, or how not to do things.”

In such an environment, Wynendaele explains it’s no longer a question of “us vs. them,” i.e., crypto vs incumbents, especially as the market will eventually decide the best outcome.

Patrick Heusser, the chief commercial officer at Crypto Finance, echoed his comments. He told Cointelgraph: “I would say it’s not everything that’s been done in traditional finance is wrong. Regulation is not always wrong.”

Heusser during one of the panels at EBC. Source: José Val Bal

Cathy We, Investment Associate at NGC Ventures, offered a contrarian view on regulation, at least for the short term. She told Cointelegraph that “The type of scrutiny we’re seeing in the market from regulators is something that obviously is not good to see in this bear market in the short term.”

Cointelegraph’s Yana Prikhodchenko introduces the CT acceleration award. Source: José Val Bal

“In the long term, it will actually create such a much better environment for everybody, for liquidity, for a lot of the new ideas to form safely and for talent, she added”

“You want your best talent to work in a very compliant environment, so they don’t get caught and get go to jail or any of that. So I think I think regulation was the long term is going to be super helpful.”

Indeed light of a bear market in which the likes of FTX, Luna, Celsius and BlockFi blackened the crypto industry’s reputation, John Murillo, who spent decades in traditional finance, summed up the industry’s needs succinctly:

“Regulation brings transparency. Transparency ultimately brings credibility, and credibility is what everyone is seeking for.”

While regulation was the mot du jour, innovation and disruption to the traditional finance space were excitedly spoken about.

Related: Market makers in the crypto industry: party planners or bartenders?

A new phrase was coined during the conference, “recycle to earn.” The phrase is blockchain company Circularr’s slogan, which participated and then won the CT accelerator prize.

Circularr took home the prize worth $35,000. Pictured Daniel Salmeron (EBC), Eric Vogel (Circularr), Victoria Gago (EBV) and Prikhodchenko. Photo: José Val Bal

Circularr is a blockchain-based recycling pioneer who hopes to bring trust back to recycling. The team won a $35,000 value grant courtesy of Cointelegraph following a slick one-minute pitch on stage during the start-up pitch competition. The startup pitch brought the conference to a climax and reminded the audience of the Web3 industry’s roots, that of disruption, innovation and ownership.