An article was published by CryptoShoppe with the challenge to refute some claims. Some of CSW's claims I agree with. Others I don't. Here are the original 12 claims published by Cryptoshoppe (I have not verified if CSW actually made or is making the claims) and my comments to follow...

1) Selfish Mining is a Fallacy claim 2) Proof-Of-Stake and or Distributed Ledger coins will become registered securities claim. 3) ICO’s will become illegal soon claim. 4) Jihan Wu wants Proof-Of-Stake because he wants control without work claim. 5) Someone can brute force and access the Wormhole Cash Burn Address claim. 6) Bitcoin scales better without CTOR and Graphene as they are required for OMNI (Wormhole Cash) which is insecure and can’t handle reorg and orphans claim. 7) “The only proof is proof of work” claim. Argue that other suitable algorithms exist. 8) PoS is those only seeking power claim. 9) Omni (Wormhole Cash) doesn’t work with 0-Conf transactions claim. 10) Stealth coins can’t be fungible because they can’t be proven to have transacted in good faith. Merchants have no right to anonymous systems (unlawful) claim. 11) Omni (Wormhole Cash) and Lightning are parasitic layer 0 claim. 12) Wormhole Cash Burn Address is regular a Bitcoin Cash address instead claim.





1. Regarding "Selfish Mining", I haven't studied the subject in depth, but let's analyze expert opinion: The original selfish mining paper was published in a peer reviewed university library: https://arxiv.org/abs/1311.0243

Here is a relevant article by Vitalik Buterin, who most would consider an expert on cryptocurrency: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/selfish-mining-a-25-attack-against-the-bitcoin-network-1383578440/

By contrast, Craig Wright's paper has been accused of being based on plagiarism, with large sections being lifted from another paper, and in this context arguably don't even make sense: https://coinjournal.net/craig-wright-accused-of-plagiarism/ 2) Regarding Proof of Stake coins becoming registered securities, different jurisdictions will have different laws. The SEC chairman has said that coins offered through a fund raising process are securities. This does not apply to all PoS coins.

3) ICOs will almost certainly not be illegal in all jurisdictions. In fact, some countries (for example Bermuda and Malta) are setting up specific regulation for ICOs.

4) This attack on Jihan's character (that he wants to control and not work) is ludicrous. Jihan Wu is one of the hardest working people in the space. A personal anecdote: In Hong Kong, Jihan was one of the few people who did not attend the after party (I am told he does not drink), and instead chose to rest up so the next morning he could hold another 8 AM meeting to discuss ecosystem development. Others (that I won't name) were too tired or hungover to attend.

5) Good luck brute forcing an address with 18 consecutive "1"s. Some kitchen table math: Let's discard the first 1 as its part of the encoding. That leaves 17 "1"s. Given the base58 encoding, let's do 58^17 = 951,208,868,148,684,143,308,060,622,848 possibilities for those characters. That's 951,208 trillion trillion. By comparison this is many more orders of magnitude higher than the number of hashes the entire BTC network does.*

6) CTOR is obviously not required for Wormhole as Wormhole works today without it. Wormhole is a secondary consensus layer. The same as SLP. I am one of the authors of SLP so I know something about this. In the event of an orphan, calculations have to be redone for the previous block. I have yet to see any logical reason why this would change for any token scheme or for any transaction ordering.

7. I agree that PoW is the best way to secure cryptocurrency.

8. I agree that PoS is rent seeking by nature when it comes to money. Some other projects (smart contracts) may be ok using PoS.

9. Wormhole works today with 0 conf as well as any other system as far as I know. If there is a reason it doesn't, the burden of proof is on the person making that assertion.

10. It is true that some governments could be hostile to privacy coins. For this reason, it may be best to have privacy features be optional for Bitcoin Cash.

11. Lightning is not parasitic on BTC because it is a second layer; it is parasitic because the first layer is intentionally choked for it to thrive. As long as the first layer on BCH is not throttled, Wormhole and other token schemes will not be parasitic.

12. "Regular" addresses typically do not have 18 consecutive 1s. It is true that a burn address could also be provably undspendable but this does not make the current address unsafe.