Bitcoin Pioneer Adam Back Questions Telegram Founder Durov Over GRAM Token Supply

Blockstream CEO Adam Back publicly criticized the economic model of Gram ($GRAM), the token heavily associated with Pavel Durov and popular messenger Telegram. The well-known cypherpunk and Bitcoin pioneer commented on the entrepreneur’s statement about currency issuance of fiat.

This happened on the day when the TON token officially returned to its historic name, Gram.

Back’s remark was prompted by a post from Pavel Durov, in which he once again criticized the traditional financial system and supported the concept of Bitcoin. “The government keeps printing money like there’s no tomorrow. Nobody is printing Bitcoin,” the Telegram founder said.

Adam Back reacted to the post with a short ironic comment, pointing to Durov’s own blockchain ecosystem: “someone is printing $GRAM though eh :).” Pavel Durov has not responded to Back’s comment yet.

Why Adam Back is a Telegram cryptocurrency skeptic

Back’s current skepticism continues his long-standing position toward Telegram’s crypto initiatives. According to posts from January 2020 on what was then Twitter, during Durov’s legal battles with U.S. regulators, Back made similar remarks and openly called Telegram’s first ICO a “naked money grab.”

Back argued that, unlike classic venture capital, buyers of Gram tokens effectively received no corporate rights or investor protection.

At the same time, Back acknowledged the inconsistency of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. He said that a complete block of Durov’s project, against the backdrop of a symbolic fine for the EOS blockchain, looked unfair and resembled “shooting a mosquito with a bazooka.”

Following the SEC’s crackdown, Durov was forced to abandon Gram, leading independent developers to continue the project under the Toncoin name.

Back’s jab coincided with the official rebranding of the cryptocurrency, when the ticker of the main token of The Open Network (TON) was officially changed to $GRAM after 81.22% of community participants voted to return to the project’s original 2018 name.