Personally, I was most interested in the Consensus Debate: Should I Be Allowed to Transact With Anyone? Modelled after Intelligence Squared or Oxford-style formats, the discussion addressed our ability to transact as a human right, on a public blockchain or elsewhere.
As Jacob Donnelly wrote on Coindesk a month ago --
"On one hand, the basic freedoms embedded into the value system of the post-Enlightenment world (speech, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, etc.) revolve around the principle that these rights are inalienable. On the other hand, it can be argued, they are conditional upon meeting certain conditions or obligations to society.
Where does transacting on a public blockchain fit on this spectrum? How is the ethos behind the early cypherpunks’ vision of bitcoin – the concept of transacting without need of a third-party intermediary that could potential censor or block the transaction – still relevant and applicable in today’s world?"
Anderson Kill attorney Stephen Palley moderated the panel featuring:
Amber Baldet, Co-Founder and CEO of Clovyr
Yaya Fanusie, Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Alex Gladstein, Chief Strategy Office, Human Rights Foundation
Vinay Gupta, CEO, Mattereum