Ripple CTO Joins Debate On Bitcoin Versus Gold, Says Crypto Cannot Be Replicated

The long-running question about whether another cryptocurrency can truly match what Bitcoin represents has resurfaced, and Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer David Schwartz has stepped forward to offer his opinion. 

His comments were based on an argument claiming that Bitcoin’s properties could be copied by simply recreating its code. This, in turn, was based on comments regarding a debate between Binance founder Changpeng Zhao and Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff.

Inside The Zhao-Schiff Debate On Bitcoin’s Value

During their discussion at the Binance Blockchain Week, Schiff stated that a token backed by gold is grounded in physical utility because the token merely represents ownership of a scarce commodity used by industries across the world. He contrasted this with Bitcoin, which he claimed derives its value from faith and has no practical use. 

Zhao countered by pointing out that even physical gold is difficult to divide or verify without additional processes, noting that he once received a gold bar as a gift but could not break it or confirm its purity without specialized tools. He contrasted this directly with Bitcoin, which can be transferred and verified instantly through the blockchain.

Again, Schiff responded by insisting that Bitcoin remains worthless to him because you can’t do anything with it, while gold carries intrinsic industrial demand. Zhao pushed back by highlighting that Bitcoin’s utility is tied to its transparent network, fixed supply, and verifiable ownership. He argued that unlike gold, whose total global reserves are uncertain, Bitcoin offers perfect clarity about supply and movement. 

The debate eventually escalated into a broader argument over value, with Schiff insisting Bitcoin has only speculative worth, while Zhao maintained that its network and transparency serve as the foundation for its trillion-dollar market capitalization.

“We’ll agree to disagree,” Zhao said.

Comment Raises Question: Can Bitcoin Be Replicated?

Following the debate, a viewer commented that Bitcoin’s uniqueness is overstated because someone could simply replicate it. The comment noted, “How long would it take to replicate Bitcoin? Create a new one, exactly the same. How much would it cost?”

It was this claim, rooted in Schiff’s argument that Bitcoin lacks intrinsic qualities, that led to David Schwartz entering the conversation.

Schwartz responded with a rhetorical question that cuts through the idea entirely. He asked how the new Bitcoin could be new and exactly the same as the original one. He continued, “And how would the existence of replicas of Bitcoin affect Bitcoin?” 

His point echoed Zhao’s argument about verifiability. A replica may copy Bitcoin’s code, but it cannot copy the network of users, miners, institutions, and real-time validation that give Bitcoin its identity. 

The existence of another chain does not dilute Bitcoin’s legitimacy any more than counterfeit gold reduces the value of real gold when proper verification exists. It also goes back to the comment by Changpeng Zhao that Bitcoin can be easily verified in multiple ways, unlike gold.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView