James Allan Left internet-computer:native for kaspa:native Kaspa—And Got the Technology Backwards. Here's my detailed response based on the text to his recent post Classic

I’m not James. Read the actual vProg paper, not AI generated slop. You got everything wrong. Here is another vid

@Classicxbt Hey Jerry can we have an honest 1 on 1 private call to maybe really help you understand what many of us in Kaspa here understand?

Most of the arguments are based on an outdated understanding of what Kaspa is. 1. "Kaspa solves nothing." That's simply false. Kaspa's original contribution isn't smart contracts. It's consensus. GHOSTDAG addresses Bitcoin's security vs. throughput tradeoff by replacing the longest-chain model with a BlockDAG while preserving Proof of Work. 2. "ICP runs applications. Kaspa only orders transactions." That hasn't been true for a while. Kaspa's base layer is no longer just an ordering engine. With Toccata, L1 gained native covenants, transaction introspection and on-chain ZK proof verification. General-purpose execution is still intentionally kept outside the consensus layer, but reducing Kaspa to "just ordering transactions" is no longer an accurate description. 3. "Off-chain execution is worthless." If that's the argument, then every major Ethereum rollup would be worthless too. Separating consensus from execution has become one of the industry's dominant scaling strategies because it improves scalability without forcing every node to execute every application. 4. "Everyone already does this." Not really. Rollups are common. A high-throughput PoW BlockDAG serving as the foundation for programmable verification and layered execution is not. 5. "ICP already has on-chain computation." It does, because that's what ICP was designed for. Kaspa was designed around scalable consensus first. They're solving different problems, so comparing one architecture against the other as if they had identical goals doesn't make much sense. 6. "Kaspa is unfinished." Every major protocol evolves. Bitcoin introduced SegWit, Lightning and Taproot years after launch. Ethereum is still redesigning execution, data availability and scaling. Ongoing development isn't evidence that a protocol doesn't work. 7. "Kaspa creators don't understand vProgs." Ironically, many critics are still arguing against concepts from old presentations. The current vProgs direction has evolved significantly and is being developed in the open. Criticizing early ideas while ignoring the current architecture isn't a technical argument. 8. "ZK destroys composability." That's one of the problems the current architecture is explicitly trying to solve. The goal isn't simply adding ZK proofs. It's enabling sovereign execution while preserving composability wherever possible. 9. "Kaspa only verifies receipts." No. The base layer provides BlockDAG consensus, global ordering, data availability, state commitments, programmable covenants, transaction introspection and native ZK proof verification. General application execution is intentionally separated from consensus. That's a design choice, not a missing feature. 10. "ICP has been doing this for five years." Good. But Kaspa isn't trying to become ICP. You're comparing ICP's replicated execution engine with Kaspa's consensus protocol. Those aren't equivalent layers, and after Toccata the comparison is even less accurate because Kaspa's base layer now exposes programmable verification capabilities of its own. 11. "AI proved Kaspa is inferior." AI doesn't determine who's right. It reflects the information it's given. If the prompt ignores the latest architecture, the answer will ignore it too. The biggest problem with the video isn't that it prefers ICP. That's perfectly fine. The problem is that it compares different layers of two completely different architectures and treats them as if they're solving the same problem. Compare consensus to consensus. Compare execution to execution. That's where the real technical discussion begins.

@Classicxbt turn around got ur face split :)

@Classicxbt I don't see the point in ICP, we already got AWS and AZURE, why another centralized cloud infrastructure? study Bitcoin, study KAS bro...

Well i asked Grok and and here's all the Bullshit he got wrong: Here’s a balanced list of the main things Jerry Banfield likely got wrong, overstated, or framed misleadingly in the video (based on technical realities of both projects as of July 2026): 1. Overly dismissive of Kaspa/vProgs (“Solves Nothing” / “Useless”) This is the biggest exaggeration. While vProgs rely on off-chain execution + ZK verification, this is a deliberate, well-regarded scaling approach (similar to optimistic/zk rollups but anchored directly to a high-throughput L1). It keeps the base layer lightweight, avoids global VM bottlenecks, and enables high parallelism. Many view it as a strength for scalability and security, not a failure.9a3d4b Kasmedia Composability: Jerry claims ZK breaks it, but vProgs are designed for atomic cross-program calls and instant composability during execution (before proof submission). This is a key selling point from Kaspa developers. 2. Underplaying ICP’s Real Limitations Replication costs & performance: Full on-chain replication across subnets does create high redundancy overhead. This leads to higher operational costs for developers and can limit extreme scalability compared to non-replicated models. Critics (including some in the ICP community) note subnet rigidity, potential bottlenecks, and that not everything benefits from full replication. Decentralization tradeoffs: Subnets (especially smaller 13-node ones) require fewer nodes to compromise than a larger global set. Geographic/operator concentration and NNS governance introduce vectors that pure PoW systems like Kaspa avoid. Jerry frames replication as unambiguously superior — it’s a tradeoff. Maturity vs. vision: ICP is more mature for full apps today, but Jerry sometimes presents it as having solved all problems while Kaspa is purely hypothetical. Both have evolving roadmaps. 3. Framing the Comparison Unfairly He compares ICP’s current production system against Kaspa’s theoretical/promised benefits in places, but also criticizes James for doing the reverse. The fairest view is acknowledging both: ICP delivers more today for complex on-chain dApps; Kaspa prioritizes raw speed, minimalism, and future-proof verification. Off-chain trust: While execution happens off-chain in vProgs, the ZK proof + L1 anchoring provides strong cryptographic guarantees. It’s not the same as fully centralized off-chain systems Jerry equates it to. 4. Potential Overstatements on Trust & Composability Jerry says Kaspa “hasn’t escaped the off-chain trust problem.” This is partially true pre-proof verification, but once proofs are on-chain and validated, trust is minimized. ICP’s replicated model also has trust assumptions (node operators, subnet security thresholds). Deterministic decentralization: ICP’s subnet selection is sophisticated, but not immune to criticism regarding real-world independence.

@Classicxbt Bro, I think I’ve found the perfect girl for you! 😂

@Classicxbt What the hell did I just watch??? I'm making a response video 💚

@Classicxbt #icp

@Classicxbt bro thos guy is a clown that invested most of his life savings in to icp and now trying get other from kas on to it.

@Classicxbt @CityXcapeInc we need James back to making some more $KAS videos! Give a toccata breakdown and maybe how it relates to your project as well. Especially since @ScapeSquad isn’t making vids as of now 😭 🤣

@Classicxbt This dude has always been retarded from the beginning

@Classicxbt KASpa is like a horse, I C P is like multiple sportcars

@monkey898898 @Classicxbt Kaspa😂🤣

According to LinkedIn, Jerry has been on the platform since 2018, but he only has one connection and is unverified. The company he claims to work for, BTC Concept, is a French packaging company. He has zero tech background, but James is wrong. Jerry is a grandiose narcissist: overconfident and prone to relying entirely on his own intuition to make decisions.

@Classicxbt banger!! 💃🏾🕺🏾

@Classicxbt "Talk with me"

@Classicxbt backwards 😆😆😆😆😆

@Classicxbt What a joke....

@Classicxbt Icp lol

@Classicxbt A guy that's way more knowledgeable than a low key youtuber like you leaves a project and you come here to whine using chatgpt? You're CRYPTO CLOWN #1

@Classicxbt @jerrybanfield Please make a live discussion with @KaspaSilver

@Classicxbt You bias YouTuber, we all know the tech of kaspa:native

@Classicxbt Hey bro, i saw u love to use the ai. So i give it the new data about #kas tools 👇🏿🙄 No hate bro.. we welcome everyone

@Classicxbt Heay Jerry Banfield DYOR on Kaspa Before you said kaspa solve nothing

@Classicxbt The cope is real 🤡

@Classicxbt James Allan was a stud at first...

@Classicxbt

@Classicxbt James is a low energy bum

@Classicxbt ahahhahaha okay clown 🤡

@Classicxbt You're spinning out. you lost the argument at the 5 and 8 minute mark. Blockchains are not designed to be a compute layer.

@Classicxbt Go eat some proper food. You look unwell.

@Classicxbt Meanwhile Jerry Banfield only solves one thing…keeping ICP price low but did Dfinity even need him for that?

@Classicxbt Jerry grow up dude, you are such a wuss ⛔️🤡

@Classicxbt Who's James Allen?