SCI Ventures Inc. Statement on the New York Agreement and Segwit2x

We at SCI Ventures Inc. started our entire business on Bitcoin technology in 2014 because we believed in its valuable properties of decentralization, censorship resistance, and permissionless innovation. Like most Blockchain companies, we have relied on the tireless efforts of hundreds of developers working on Bitcoin Core to keep the software reliable and useful, governed by a modern system of user contributions, peer reviews, public discussions and consensus decision making.

While we do believe the New York Agreement (NYA) and Segwit2x proponents have the best of intentions in attempting to improve Bitcoin’s protocol and have contributed so much to the development of the Bitcoin industry as a whole, we do not agree with the process by which they chose to enforce these changes. Here are some important reasons why we oppose the Segwit2x hard fork:

1. The Importance of the BIP process
   This should have been the first and last argument in this debate. Bitcoin Improvement Proposals or BIPs have always been the way to move forward. The process is democratic and fair to all. No BIP, no changes. It has worked so far for the last eight years, and there is no reason why it should be bypassed now. The list of BIPs submitted so far to the Bitcoin community can be found here.
2. Overwhelming user support and consensus is needed
   The Bitcoin project is still in early development and has much room to mature. We’ve always believed that one of the most appealing features of Bitcoin is that for any changes to occur on the protocol level, overwhelming consensus is needed from all parties involved. We do not see this with segwit2x.
3. Pursuing a hard fork without 100% technical confidence in the development team
   It is evident that the technical development behind segwit2x is not as robust as Bitcoin core development, as evidenced by a comparison of BTC1’s and Bitcoin Core’s code repository. Bitcoin Core is obviously the superior development team from a purely technical standpoint, with most years of experience in developing Bitcoin software under their belts and the most number of volunteer expert developers. Any deliberate hard forks to change consensus mechanisms will always be a risky endeavor and needs total confidence in its implementation. Segwit2x is focused on the single politicized issue of a block size increase, something that has still many technical issues that needs addressing and should not be rushed.
4. Replay protection or lack thereof
   What is replay protection? When a fork happens, all past transactions are copied from the original Bitcoin blockchain onto the segwit2x blockchain. Everyone who owns bitcoins will own a corresponding amount of bitcoins on the new forked chain. Without replay protection, new transactions will be equally valid on both chains. This means that these transactions can be copied or replayed from one chain to the other. This is called a replay attack.
   In the beginning, the segwit2x group claimed that they would offer no replay protection to Bitcoin users. Then they changed their mind and offered a weak proposal. Then they changed their mind and took it back as soon as serious issues were pointed out by the community. With about a week left until the date of the fork, this is still up in the air, leaving users uncertain and at risk.

While we believe that these debates and arguments are a sign that the Bitcoin industry is evolving at a healthy pace, we also believe that, in its current form, the segwit2x project has put the Bitcoin network under unnecessary stress. There are steps to take to ensure that a hard fork is done safely and with ample time for the ecosystem to prepare for it.

We as a company wish only to continue building products and services using Bitcoin technology and will support our customers and users first above everything else. We have a responsibility to these people, as well as our stakeholders and the Philippine Bitcoin community, to carefully assess and evaluate any new developments in the technology. We all know there are enough challenges to face in building a startup in this industry: regulatory hurdles, scams, hackers, and more — and this politically driven debate is not helping us find solutions to move forward. We hope the community reaches an ultimately amicable solution to these problems.

At the end of the day, we are a service provider using Bitcoin and other blockchain technologies to provide people an opportunity to participate in the global financial network like never before, and we want to keep doing this in the years to come. This is only possible if the software we run is sound and reliable. The success of the industry depends on the tried and tested processes that has gotten Bitcoin to where it is today. That being said, if the fork does happen, we will accommodate user requests to access both chains as needed. We urge the people and organizations involved to let clear heads prevail and allow the Bitcoin experiment to reach its true potential.