Debate: The morality of decentralization in crypto, with Udi and David

In this episode of UpOnly, Ledger hosts a charity debate between Udi Wertheimer and David Hoffman about decentralization and moral prerequisites in blockchain design. CMS Holdings very kindly donated $300,000 to the development of Bitcoin to sponsor this debate..

Audio Version


Show Partner

This episode is presented by FTX. Trade on an awesome mobile interface fee-free, and still get all the great portfolio tracking features you know and love:

Show Notes


– Drama kicked off from Zhu Su vs Kain

– Udi and David then got started on decentralisation

– CMS (@cmsholdings) offered $300k in donations to BTC development to have this debate happen live

– Ledger should be out with his wife right now having a nice time but for some reason chooses to be here???


– Udi believes it’s normal for people to look to other chains and opportunities vs maximalists

– It’s not up to individuals to decide what’s right for people to be interested in crypto

– Doesn’t make someone a ‘sinner’

– David believes if you don’t have decentralisation then you don’t have anything

– David: BTC and ETH are decentralised, AVAX and SOL are decentralised compared to real world but not in terms of crypto

– David: Ethereum has a history of inclusivity. Ledger: Then why are transactions so expensive is that inclusive to newcomers?

– David: alternative L1s are only for the short term and low fees are only achieved by compromising decentralisation

– Udi: If you have $50k and want to buy an NFT of a cat, the NFT and USDC are centralised. Why would you spend higher fee price on ETH for decentralisation with underlying centralisation anyway? The buyer doesn’t care

– David: You shouldn’t be doing that on the L1 anyway. Roll up centric roadmap solves this. Alt L1s are like blockchains on training wheels and closer to the Web2 platforms they’re used to

– David: 3AC missed out on Solana so picked Avalanche as the next thing that pumps to be early on it. 3AC tweeting for exit liquidity although there is no proof on that

– David: It comes down to genesis, who gets the tokens is important. 48% of Solana was sold to ‘insiders’ vs 15% on Ethereum (quotes Messari). Udi: What if that’s bad, what if the Ethereum Foundation would’ve been better aligned to have higher allocation? It’s not possible to do another sale like Ethereum again legally

– Ledger: is there a clear line on right vs wrong on projects? Udi: I wouldn’t support outright scams and those exist, I dislike things like Shiba Inu too but if people want to play these games then they can. Supporter of free markets as long as it’s not being misrepresented. David: Wish people cared more about things being long term unsustainable and people knowing these things and still promoting SOL & AVAX as long term solutions is dishonest and immoral


  ⁃  Udi: Supports free markets, even if BSV is a scam ppl should be able to trade it

  ⁃  David: Friction come from debating time frames for investors

  ⁃  Promoting scammy ecosystems as long term holds is wrong

  ⁃  Udi: Ppl investing in AVAX/SOL now will be happy with short term growth

  ⁃  If decentralization/scalability becomes an issue they’ll fix it

  ⁃  Ledger: David defend the security of MATIC/BSC

  ⁃  David: Polygon has same commitment to values as Ethereum, started centralized to capture users

  ⁃  Udi: That’s the same as AVAX! AVAX is even easier to use

  ⁃  David has not used AVAX bridge

Trade propositions

  ⁃  Ledger: BTC down 50% or shitcoin up 200%

  ⁃  Udi: If he knows for sure, he’d take the trade

  ⁃  Ledger: ETH down 50% or AVAX/SOL up 200%

  ⁃  David: If it’s 100% going to happen he’d be irrational to not take the trade

  ⁃  Ledger: It seems like you both agree that number goes up matters most

  ⁃  There’s a line you’re willing to cross for participation in an ecosystem

Twitter Influence

  ⁃  David: 3AC likes to use their influence and change their opinions a lot

  ⁃  Udi: You like using your influence too

  ⁃  David: But I’ve never changed my opinion or conviction

  ⁃  Udi: That’s the sin! Not learning about what’s going on and changing views

  ⁃  Udi: If new information presents itself you should adjust conviction

Ethereum Innovation

  ⁃  David: Ethereum has stuck to their mission and is innovating to meet it

  ⁃  Trying to be secure Layer 1 for the world, Layer 2’s and roll ups will scale it

  ⁃  Ledger: Ethereum still too expensive for the average person to use

  ⁃  David: Hasn’t knocked people for using AVAX/SOL but they did make a trade off on centralization for fees

Chat Question

  ⁃  Q: New chain comes out, better token distribution and more decentralized than ETH would you switch to it?

  ⁃  David: Yes, I’m not an ETH maxi I’m a decentralization maxi

  ⁃  Udi: You’re using the same argument as bitcoin maxis did

  ⁃  Ledger: Describes properties of ZEC that would make David a maxi lmao

  ⁃  David: But it’s not turing complete

  ⁃  Ledger: ZEC is on trajectory to becoming Turing complete

  ⁃  David “maybe I’m missing something, if I start seeing roll ups on ZEC and meaningful traction I’ll diversify”

Closing Statements

  ⁃  David: “Two kinds of people in crypto, optimists and nihilists. People that bear the responsibility of creating the future of finance or those that just trade”

  ⁃  Udi: “This happened because Dan from CMS Holdings made a donation. Many would argue CMS falls under your definition of nihilist as traders, but they take their money and use it for good. A rational way to look at these markets is they are inefficient, and we can take advantage of this to make money and then invest in changes we want to see”

Notes by Kevin

Music by GiovanniPickle