From Ark Labs’ innovation to El Salvador’s prospects, through quantum computing and advice for those wanting to enter the sector: the president of Plan ₿ Network speaks.
On the sidelines of the Plan ₿ Forum in Lugano, Giacomo Zucco, president of Plan ₿ Network, gave an interview to Atlas21’s microphones, addressing topics such as the evolution of the Lightning Network, adoption prospects as a means of payment, quantum FUD and El Salvador’s role in the ecosystem.
The title of your speech at Spazio 21 was quite provocative: “Will Bitcoin Core kill Bitcoin?”. Can you give us a preview?
“The title is clearly clickbait. Over the years Bitcoin has shown that it tends to survive: it has been declared dead countless times, yet it’s still here. I would be very skeptical about the title of my presentation”.
Ark Labs has launched Arkade in public beta version. What’s your opinion?
“I’m extremely bullish on Arkade, really enthusiastic. To understand its importance, we need to start from the original idea of the Lightning Network: dividing Bitcoin’s global consensus into small portions within Lightning channels, which can then exchange value with each other forming a unified network. The concept is excellent and is working well.
However, there’s a problem: the channel structure works perfectly for companies, large entities and nerds, but it’s not optimal for the end or average user. Onboarding a new user through a Lightning channel is a complex process. The real strength of Arkade lies in the fact that it doesn’t propose itself as a substitute for the Lightning Network, but only for traditional Lightning channels, representing the last step of the user experience. Arkade is the perfect complement to the Lightning Network: a new type of channel that operates within the LN itself. Arkade always allows a unilateral exit from the protocol and permits self-custody, but with easy onboarding and an excellent user experience.
Furthermore, protocols like Arkade will help Bitcoin become more spam-resistant and censorship-resistant, aggregating off-chain the fee pressure coming from different users. In practice, many users can combine their fees into a single on-chain fee capable of competing with both spam attacks and censorship attacks, preventing blocks from remaining empty”.
Was the Lightning Network promoted in the wrong way initially?
“Perhaps a bit. The idea of LN as the only way to follow conceptually was excellent. The mistakes were mainly two: first, identifying LN exclusively with Dryja-Poon channels, excellent for some use cases but not suitable for others; second, promoting it as already ready for mass use, when in reality it was only ready for some specific use cases.
Bitcoin is close to ossification. Lightning Network was an experiment, it still is, and one of the things that will transform it will be precisely the integration of solutions like Arkade”.
Jack Dorsey has stated that Bitcoin could fail if it weren’t used as a medium of exchange. Do you agree?
“No, I don’t agree. I think it’s an impossible scenario because bitcoin is already used as a medium of exchange in some specific markets. For example, if you want to buy a no-KYC SIM or a VPN, many providers accept bitcoin as a payment method through hidden services on Tor. It’s also used for international payments or between digital nomads. There are already communities where you can pay with bitcoin in physical stores, even if it’s not the best use case. Bitcoin was designed to be cash through the Internet.
To increase adoption as a medium of exchange we need to solve a problem: the competitors. The first competitor is the dollar which has been slowly losing purchasing power for many years, but remains more stable than bitcoin in the short term. The second competitor is stablecoins, which I consider a scam for the regulator, which allow more freedom in secondary markets. As long as this system works, it makes little sense to use bitcoin as a daily medium of exchange. Many people aren’t using bitcoin as a medium of exchange because they can use USDT. Therefore when the dollar goes into hyperinflation or stablecoins are stopped by the regulator, only then will bitcoin fully emerge as a medium of exchange. But we’re not in a race, there’s no hurry”.
Trezor has launched its “quantum-ready” hardware wallet. Do you believe quantum computing is a threat to Bitcoin in the short term?
“The Trezor Safe 7 seems like a good product to me, with excellent design and marketing. Many have compared it to a moment similar to the iPhone launch. I like the guys at Trezor.
On quantum computing, however, I believe it doesn’t represent a threat to Bitcoin in the short term. In fact, I’m extremely skeptical. To break the elliptic cryptography used in Bitcoin requires at least 20,000 logical qubits with an error margin below a certain threshold. Today we don’t even have 1 logical qubit below that error margin. What we have are some physical qubits that, put together, can emulate a logical qubit with a very high error margin. In practice, today we have zero functioning logical qubits. When we reach 1, we’ll have plenty of time to think about possible solutions.
I don’t think I’ll see something like that happen during my lifetime. I want to clarify that quantum FUD could be useless in the best case, but in the worst case it could be harmful. If some government entities were to start pushing to switch from current algorithms to less tested, more recent “quantum-safe” algorithms, which might have backdoors or weaknesses, then the matter would become concerning. If it’s about adding new quantum-resistant algorithms to the current algorithms, that shouldn’t create problems. But if we’re talking about completely replacing current algorithms with new systems, then it would almost seem like an operation orchestrated by three-letter government agencies”.
How do you evaluate El Salvador’s experiment after four years?
“Very well. First of all there was the market cycle that influenced adoption. El Salvador’s experiment began during the peak of the 2021 bull market. Subsequently the bear market of about three years began. After the four-year market cycle, with bitcoin’s price back at high levels, there was a real possibility of a domino effect with other countries. Centralized power had to do something. That’s why there was the agreement with the IMF, which in my opinion was a smart move by President Bukele since El Salvador still needs loans. This way the IMF only postponed the domino effect.
What the IMF asked Bukele in exchange for the loan was essentially to scale back the marketing strategy related to Bitcoin: make bitcoin use non-mandatory (which in reality it already was), stop investments in mining operations (which are anyway managed by private companies that continue to operate), suspend Bitcoin education programs (which the government never carried out directly, but only facilitated through foreign companies) and stop buying one bitcoin a day by the end of 2025 (a measure that would have been stopped anyway, after the already significant investments made).
In the end only Bitcoin marketing was reduced. I think Bukele was smart to accept this compromise. On X he continues to claim he’s buying bitcoin: maybe it’s true, maybe not, but it doesn’t matter. The point is that the IMF bought some time to divert attention from the state narrative on Bitcoin. It was smart for both parties, but in fact nothing has changed.
Why is El Salvador important for Bitcoin? Because companies like Boltz, fundamental for the Lightning Network, were able to move there, create a legal headquarters and manage a business in a legally favorable environment. El Salvador acts as a sort of protection for bitcoiners. Those who go there can find friends, places to spend bitcoin, conferences and a favorable regulatory environment. I believe that the next time a domino effect at the level of state adoption begins, the IMF won’t be able to do anything to stop it”.
As president of Plan ₿ Network, what advice would you give to someone who wants to start a career in Bitcoin?
“On a purely economic level, if you have a traditional fiat job it’s better to keep it and continue buying bitcoin, remaining anonymous and keeping a low profile. This is good financial advice, but it’s not good life advice.
Economically speaking, jobs in the Bitcoin sector are hard to find, hard to maintain and not that remunerative. When in 2013 I decided to leave my fiat job and enter the Bitcoin-only sector it wasn’t a great deal financially. However, from a perspective of experience, friendships, knowledge and network, entering the Bitcoin world was one of the best moves of my life. It’s difficult. My advice is to find the best compromise for you”.
