The Bitcoin Group, the American Original, for over the last ten seconds, the sharpest Satoshi's, the best Bitcoins, the hardest cryptocurrency talk. Issue 1. Walmart and Bitcoin. If your Bitcoin is so great, why can't it be accepted in the real world? Is Bitcoin ready for the rigors of checkout? Players use their credit cards and enjoy near instantaneous transactions. Why would they wait for Bitcoin when they consume, push their cards full of RFID chips across a scanner, a process that will transform checkout? What is the future of this Bitcoin in brick and mortar retail? I ask you and Dress and to Nopolis. Well, thanks, man. Well, I don't think people will use Bitcoin to buy stuff at Walmart not for a very long time. It's not ready. The infrastructure isn't there. The point of sale systems aren't there. The corporate structure isn't there. The legal system isn't there. It's going to take a long time until you can pay for your groceries at Walmart with Bitcoin. And even if that time comes, it's probably going to be more like a loyalty card so you sign up for it in advance. Rather than a instantaneous cash-like transaction, which is ad hoc. So that's going to be a while. Derek J. I disagree strongly with Andrea. I think it's just around the corner in nine months. There will be a release of a new app for Google Glass called Glass Pay, which allows users among other things to go shopping in a regular retail store and scan the UPCs of their items with their eyes or their phone and pay with Bitcoin without even waiting in a line. So their advantages are obvious. People prefer to use the self-check out. This removes just one more layer of the payment process. So it's only a matter of time and I think that time is quick. Dolly Barker. I'm not a little of the road here. I think Andreas is right. I think technologically we're not there. I think Derek is right. I think the innovations are right around the corner. It's just a matter of demand. If it becomes something that there is a strong demand for, someone will design the software and the hardware and it'll happen. And right now there isn't. Right now it seems like Bitcoin mostly lives online and that's okay. So it'll happen as soon as the market wants it to. Is essentially my answer. I don't know how to do it. Let's just keep going. Do you want to debate it some more? Andreas you seem to disagree with Derek there. Well I'll just go launch on a tangent. The real question we should be asking ourselves is does Walmart deserve our money or should it go down in a ball of flames and smoky fire because every single purchase you make at that pit hole of hell is subsidized by taxpayers to pay for welfare for everybody working there because they don't get a living wage. So should they get our Bitcoin probably not. I'd rather like to disrupt and disintermediate Walmart whole out of existence altogether. How about we throw up brick and mortars? What if Bitcoin is too cool for brick and mortar stores and they just become completely irrelevant in the new economy? It seems like that's happening already with the best buy becoming really more of a warehouse where you go and look at things then go home and buy them on Amazon dot com. Well it's becoming even more prevalent with the discovery of 3D printers as 3D printers move from the consumer from the commercial market into homes. We're going to see more and more people not even needing to go out to a brick and mortar store certainly they can pay for their designs and Bitcoin. So the end of brick and mortar I think Davies right is just around the quarter. This leads perfectly into our next issue issue to Amazon dot com Amazon dot com is the world's largest online retailer with their amazing e marketplace that literally sells everything from books to the kitchen sink but they don't take bitcoins. The world's largest online auction place also says no why haven't these internet giants bent their need you're all mighty Bitcoin and when will they why haven't they yet and what's stopping them I'm looking at you Derek J. Well it's obvious okay so Amazon does accept Bitcoin and I've used Bitcoin through Amazon to purchase not only the microphone that I'm using now but the mixer that I'm using the jacket and shirt that I wear all of these things I'm able to purchase through Amazon using just another app gift is one but it's not the only one. GYFT is an app that people can use on your standard smart phone and to use that to go from bitcoins on your phone to close on your body and it is possible to use Bitcoin in those major stores you can even purchase a victimless crime spree at Amazon using bitcoins. Let's see. Donnie Barker what do you say? I want to make the same argument for eBay. I have an eBay account and I sell products on eBay and eBay doesn't accept Bitcoin but all of my eBay listings have links to my bitmid account and my bitmid account does take Bitcoin. So if a person is surfing eBay and they see my product and they want to pay with Bitcoin it's just one button so I mean we're we're essentially these guys don't have to they don't have to play along we're going to work around whatever the policy is anyway. And dress on to nopless is it three knows is the questioner all wrong. When you have money that can be routed that money can be routed around problems that we made an excellent point and it's essentially the fact that you can route Bitcoin that allows you to do that that it's extremely fungible and frictionless. So let's let's look at the grand defamation of Bitcoin by Amazon.com and eBay there are 192 currencies in the world and Amazon and eBay accepts maybe three dozen of them. So where are the other 160 outraged currencies clamoring for defamation suit against Amazon.com and eBay.com where are the 130 countries where you can't buy crap from either of those companies because they can't ship it to Amazon. They also can't ship to a P.O. boxes a opposed a fp's and various other three letter acronyms the point is here that these is a first world currency problem. Amazon.com and eBay.com sell exclusively to a very very narrow part of the North American continent and the North European continent in a handful of currencies. So let's join the other slighted currencies and sue. Man, I have to mention that about a year ago Bitcoin store.com made headlines when it challenged Amazon.com eBay and some others to start accepting Bitcoin and that they would close down Bitcoin store.com which offers many of the same products as Amazon and other stores like Walmart.com. It offers many of the same products often for less if they would just accept Bitcoin. They said we will stop taking your millions of dollars from customers from you and shut down tomorrow if you'll start accepting Bitcoin. They haven't raised to that challenge yet but I think they offer still on the table and they should absolutely take advantage of it. Hey, if we started having success in all of these fields we wouldn't have a Bitcoin industry. Every single one of the businesses in the Bitcoin industry today is a bridge business. A business that could easily be a collapse if any one of the really big businesses already in that space just said, hey Bitcoin, let's do it. Boom, all of the exchanges disappear. Boom, all of the trading houses disappear. All of the banks, all of the wallets. They don't need those things because they don't exist in the real world. We need those things because where they do exist in the real world, A, they suck and two, they don't take Bitcoin. So we can simultaneously fix both of those problems in one go. We can make them take Bitcoin but we can also make services that don't suck in the first place. And those take Bitcoin by default of course. Dove your comments. Well, I mean, it seems like, I think Andreas makes an excellent point when he says that they suck. I mean, if you look at eBay, eBay used to be a fantastic sort of free market on the internet and used to be almost like a garage sale. And now it's very sort of, I mean, it feels more like a shopping mall and there's a lot more restrictions on you as a merchant. If you want to sell, there's a lot more fees. They operate through PayPal, which has a lot of tax problems. So it seems like these firms, they get big and then they get cumbersome. So even if they started taking Bitcoin, I might still prefer my sort of like niche market sort of Bitcoin native applications. You know what I started getting excited about the eBay again when they renamed themselves to sell crore and ran a really nice frictionless market for a very long time. Unfortunately, that branch of eBay shut down. So now we're stuck with the bad old eBay. You might see more innovation on that end. The speaking of Silk Road, do you think, I mean, I realized that Silk Road is in an ambiguous place right now. But do you think that Silk Road could legitimately challenge Amazon's claim to being the largest market place online? I think it appears a pair of marketplace could easily succeed in challenging any centralized marketplace and being the biggest one online if it was allowed to. But it will get regulated out of existence. Here's the thing. If you went on Silk Road when it was still open and you looked at all the products they offered, what surprised me the most was that while drugs were a big part of it, they weren't the only thing on offer there. You could buy a lot of very interesting legitimate products from Bitcoin badges to t-shirts, to brochures, to whatever you might, little chotchkes here and there, all of these available. Why? Because it was a very large, flexible, and fluid market. So it succeeded as a marketplace first. And I'd like to see some of these legacy businesses be disrupted at their base operational model, not at picking the right currency, but at delivering the right service to customers. Bitcoin should be an after effect. To the degree that Silk Road was successful or more successful than Amazon.com or will be in the future, I think it's clear that the next incarnation of the Silk Road will be even more powerful, even more user friendly, and will overtake the record set by the first Silk Road. So it's only a matter of time as this train keeps rolling and markets get more and more frictionless, I like to borrow a term from Andreas. If I had to guess between the FBI having struck a permanent and crippling strike against the war on drugs or simply created the next Silk Road 2 clone with a few weeks on a code bounty, I'd go for the latter. I think it's more than one. I think it's more than one so for a clone. I mean, there's more than one Liberty Dollar clone after Liberty Dollar got shut down. I mean, that's not what happens when you when you when you when they shut down one like free market in demand product, people learn from not the mistakes per se, but they learn from the strategy that the government used to shut them down, and then everybody tries 12 strategies. Here's the thing they don't get every attack by a government against the distributed peer to peer system is like a failed dose of antibiotics, you will kill the weakest organisms and you will allow the strongest to thrive. You will select the exact clones, whether those are alt coins or peer to peer file sharing capabilities or silk roads that can resist your particular strain of statist bio problem. So if you start attacking these services, all you're doing is help them evolve to be attack proof. Yeah. That's a good metaphor. I'm going to use that from now on. It's a failed antibiotic. That's a great one. Well, and thinking back to what Andreas was describing with the marketplace, they developed and how it was frictionless. What I was thinking about what's lost is the reputation system that they had a reputation. If that could have been separated from the silk road, but it's own generic reputation system, that could have been used for additional silk roads down the line and other websites. Do you think that failed accepting Bitcoin was a hurdle for silk road? Do you think silk road would have been a more fluid marketplace of any sort of currency could be exchanged? I don't know. When you wave that knife around, it kind of scares me and I don't want to answer. I can't reach you on my promise. Sorry. I think it would have, Dabby. There are a lot of people who use the silk road who would have preferred to trade in precious metals or other sorts of alternative currencies that are not Bitcoin. I think they'd open themselves up to more attacks if they had expanded into areas that are more easily regulated. You see, the thing with every one of these attacks against Bitcoin businesses, what we see is the complete lack of tools that the government has to carry out these attacks. They could attack Bitcoin, they can't. All the tools they have are for regulating fiat. All the attacks they can bring to bear are on the fiat exits and entries into these systems. On the other hand, if the systems had more fiat, they'd get hit even more. I say the problem with Bitcoin is dollars. I've said that. Every crash, every attack, every shutdown, it's always been on the fiat side of the transaction where the problem is. It's never on the Bitcoin side of the transaction. This is insanity because take a real life metaphor. If we regulate a deviation based on the ownership of the land where the airports are sitting, then we'd get their traditional competitors, land-based companies, complaining about this new final aviation and controlling it through the airports. With Bitcoin, every time we try to land in another currency, we get hassle that customs. That's the only place they can control. It's a bit like trying to regulate aviation through airports. The best solution to that is never land. That's not that far-fetched. It's pretty interesting to think that those loops start getting closed when you start having every level of the economy has some merchant somewhere who's interested in it. We have real estate that is taking Bitcoin. That's one step away from farms accepting Bitcoin. Then you have a complete economy. Eventually you won't ever need to catch out. Then what does the government do? They have to regulate corn. They have to get to get the point of sale. At that point they start taking Bitcoin for taxes if they're smart enough. That might be the end of them. It was later standing that the government is already expecting people to pay taxes on revenue earned from the appreciation of the value of their Bitcoins. I'm the accepting Bitcoin. Why don't I have any dollars? They want you to change it back to dollars so you can then blame Mount Gox for why you haven't paid your taxes for six months. I tried. They won't let me withdraw. Has that ever been done to any other currency that you're forced to change the currency to pay the taxes? Every currency in the world is based on forcing you to change to it to pay the taxes. That's how national sovereign currencies gain their value through the monopoly on the demand side from government. The threat that they see from Bitcoin is wholly new. This new multinational, not even national currency. What is the advantage of the Internet? That's what it is. One of the advantages of Bitcoin that I know is familiar to this group is that it can be taken across borders without having to be claimed. Typically if you're bringing cash along with you crossing an imaginary line called a state border. Those dollars or yuan or whatever it is pieces of paper that you're holding have to be registered or at least you have to notify the people when you're traveling if it's more than a certain quantity. That's not the case with Bitcoin and that's going to cause a lot of disruption with reporting if people choose to do that. The forum says cash and cash like instruments. It doesn't say memorize sequences of brain wallet keys. That's right. Since they are bits of information as you point out, Andreas, it's almost a free speech issue as well. Whereas the state, no matter what state it is, has no inherent right to tell people to say or produce any certain writing or materials. It's a little bit fuzzy with Bitcoin. Is it money or is it speech? Well, depending on what you want to do with it at a certain time, it could be either. That sounds like passwords. That sounds like exactly the problem that you have with passwords where when you're going through a checkpoint or whatever and they want to search your laptop or search your phone, there are various levels of security and warrants that they need to demand your password. You can be legally obligated to supply your password supposedly. That seems like it would be a free speech issue the same way. How can you obligate me to give you this often in merit code that opens up information on my hardware? Even better, under the US law, that falls squarely under the Fifth Amendment rights to avoid incriminating yourself through testimony. Revealing your password can be very easily extrapolated to be incriminating information if that leads to all of the transactions that you've ever done. You can very validly claim a Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. I believe that's what's going on with the Ross Albright case right now. Correct. They're not sure if he's going to give up his passwords, be forced to give up his passwords or we don't know. I would like to reiterate that this one that makes no qualms about having tortured people in the past and continuing to torture people today wouldn't surprise me if they use torture against an individual to get their money out of them. Very possible, but at the same time, it's harder to do if you have a public profile or you're in the federal court system as Ulrich is. Here's what I have to say to the FBI. You keep using the word seized. I don't think the word seized means what you think it means. That was exactly... I was utterly confused by the Silk Road coverage because it kept saying they seized Bitcoin. And every time I read it, I'm like, what does this mean? I read through like 12 articles and I'm like, what do they mean they seized Bitcoin? Like, did they take a server? Did they take his phone? Did they take his keys? Did they... what did they do? And it turns out they actually transferred them somewhere. That doesn't... that doesn't... that doesn't mean that's not what seized means when I read it in the story. Well, that's not what seized means for the FBI either. The way the FBI seized his money in a bank account is by sending the bank a letter and says, we have seized. And that's it. It's a legal construct, not a technological or practical construct. So when they say we have seized, they mean we have legally declared this money seized and to take it from us would be illegal. But you know, in Bitcoin, all that means is that you're one transaction away, which can originate anywhere in the world for that money to be unseized, which would make for the most embarrassing fiasco for the FBI in decades, which I would welcome. That's what I was disappointed about that. All of a... I was disappointed about that. All of a... I didn't have a time lock or a poison pill so that if he didn't check in every couple of days, that his money would be spread out to green piece or... Well, maybe he does. We don't know that. The only money that they have claimed to see is the hot wallets which contain 2600 Bitcoin. They haven't seized the 80 million or so, which was his personal funds. That hasn't been moved at all. And so presumably, that's still out there. I actually managed to get the guardian newspaper to issue a retraction on one of their articles because they had said that this money cannot be spent now that the FBI controls the keys. And then they also said they had to admit that they don't know, if all, as accomplices on the outside, which is the other big gap, right? Anyone else can do it. It certainly sees like it's a very large operation to be run by one man from his laptop near a coffee shop. I'm waiting for the name when they tell us he was working for the FBI. I'm sure those articles are out there if you look for them. But it just, it seems obvious that he should have a contingency plan. You know what I mean? Like he knew that he was engaged in an equal and quote, illegal operation. Why wouldn't he have laid some groundwork to prepare in the event of being shut down? Well, he was operating within the U.S. I think that gives us the information we need to know that he wasn't operating with the most paranoid state that he could have been because surely running an operation like this, the United States is the last place that he would want to be. But that didn't matter to him. So he didn't take every precaution. Yeah, that's right. I think the fundamental failing of the Silk Road was that they didn't have a button where you could flag other uses as narks. Otherwise, they would have found them by now. Why wouldn't that be abused? Why wouldn't that be abused if there was a button, if there was a button, you could flag people as narks. Because everybody would be flagged. That goes to my basic point, which is the Silk Road was a honey pot full of narks at the end of the day. But now we have this guy who goes into the honey pot full of narks, runs it and does it from his home on his laptop. And what kind of a mindset does he get to not be paranoid? Where could he develop that? I mean, we had this early. There is one explanation that we haven't explored. They got the wrong guy. It wouldn't be the first time. It's entirely possible. I mean, the real. It doesn't seem likely. The facts of the story seem to indicate that they did get the right person. Have I heard anyone heard anything contrary to that? The facts of the story were written entirely in press releases by the prosecutors. There have been no independently corroborated facts other than those. So, of course, that does support the prosecutorial story. But we really don't know anything beyond that. They have very sparingly used the word allegedly, which is only reserved for torturers nowadays. They have prosecuted this person with a lot of claims, but not much evidence. We'll see. I'm excited. I'm excited. I think still grown as part of why Bitcoin is up to tell you the truth. When the story broke, Bitcoin tainted and then it went right back up at the end of the day. That shows resiliency. Now that it's getting all this press, it's going to be mentioned in every article that the Silk Road is covered in. More people will be googling it, more people will be interested. They'll see that this crash was flashing the pan. It's a strong currency. So that means that more people are going to be using it in the price will go up. You know what they say about publicity. There's no such thing as bad publicity. You can say whatever the hell you want about me, just make sure you spell my name right. So, all of that two weeks of coverage, they spell the name right. Give it three months. That'll be a $250 Bitcoin. That'll be nice. All right. Issue three in Bitcoin we trust hard currency exists because of trust in precious metals. Fiat currencies exist because of trust in economic systems. Virtual occurrences exist because of faith in mathematics in cryptography we trust. Or is this just another case of faith like Fiat, but this time with a digital God rather than a federally reserved one. And what about the miners you say there's no central bank, but I certainly see a cabal of miners, dovey Barker your thoughts. Okay, so why are precious metals predictable precious metals are predictable because the laws of physics exist in nature. So why is Bitcoin predictable Bitcoin is predictable because the laws of mathematics exist in nature. It's not tangible, but it is science. It's a protocol. It's a program that is predictable. And that's fundamentally why gold and silver, like imagine for a moment if gold was valuable because it had an industrial use, but it only worked 50% of the time. And I was like it was a totally like like like variable as to whether or not gold was going to do what physics says it should do. It would no longer be valuable as a currency. It's the predictability not necessarily the tangibility that makes it valuable. Interesting. Derek J. I like the decentralized nature of Bitcoin, the fact that individuals, including myself are able to look at the code that people are working with, suggest different code and it's sort of a process of what people think is the right direction to take it. It gives me a lot more faith putting my trust in coders rather than people who meet in secret rooms. But that the creation of Bitcoin and trust in it aside, you mentioned a cabal of miners. I think some people could argue that there's a group of miners that have more power than others, which is true when you add up all of their mining power. But I have a small mining rig here myself. And so I don't feel like individuals can be completely blocked out from participating in Bitcoin mining. It's something that anyone can participate in. And that fact makes it more secure. Andress. We've unwanted history lesson. In God we trust was added in 1954 by an anti-communist crusader following the Joe McCarthyite which hunts or comi hunts in Congress. Before that, the national motto was a pluribus unum out of many comes one. In God we trust was added 22 years after the decline of the gold standard. And we switched our trust from gold to God dropping an L. And as a result, our currency has devalued accordingly. Back in currency by fictional beings doesn't really help. A pluribus unum is a much better slogan because out of many comes one is the Bitcoin ethos. Bitcoin has emergent value that comes out of the collaboration of thousands of nodes each offering their computational capability. Bitcoin is backed by the computational capability of the internet, a very tangible silicon based system that is very effective as a store value. So I prefer a pluribus unum from in God we trust. It's just like the pledge adding under God to the pledge was around the same time. Exactly the same time by exactly the same comedian con. It's to fight godless communism. It was to fight godless communism and before that our national motto did not have any mention of God just like all the other founding government documents. Speaking of motto's and money some of the first motto on money in North America said mind your business. That's sort of yes I was Ben Franklin's mint and he wrote mind your business on the back of the silver dollar right. I like it both both on a message like mind your business and both on a like personal if you have a business you should be minding it that's your job. That's right. I think that was the original meaning of the phrase back then. Yeah it wasn't so much on the harsh nature of it like shut your mouth. It was no that. That's don't tread on me different flag. I'd like to see that on some currency. What do you guys think of strengthen numbers is the Bitcoin motto have you seen that around. Or I would like to know more one said there's strength and numbers large prime numbers. I prefer to resurrect the mind your business motto I think Bitcoin is a mind your business currency it's one that you can attach an identity to or not. And it's one that you can give to others or not they can't take it from you in the same way that cash can be taken or digital money in your bank account. Now I compromise. You go ahead. Out of compromise. Why don't we go out of many comes one the strengthen numbers and mind your own business. I'm going to say mind mind your business fits really well with the honey badger of money. That's a good name. I'm together. Excellent. It's keep going. Issue four Bitcoin mining that asick revolution is clearly upon us since June of this year having Bitcoin miners in your home has had the same value as space heaters in the summertime. Unless you've got the money for a $14,000 asick is the era of home mining over I ask you and dress and monopolists. Now it's only just beginning. We had to first completely eradicate the era of CPU mining and then destroy the era of GPU mining and then obliterate the era of FBGA mining. Each one of those was a 10x to 1000x increase in performance. But we've had a wall and that wall is silicon density and heat capacity right so. From this point on the only extra juice you can squeeze out of a system like that involves taking your design to a fab that can put it on a smaller die and put more of it on a die. So you have to go from 28 nanometers to 20 nanometers etc. etc. and keep scaling down. We're not going to see these enormous increases in hashing power in the next generations because we just squeezed out all of the low hanging fruit in just six months. What that means is that now there is an industrial base for Bitcoin and not just consumer and craft space. We actually have an industrial manufacturing base that is now being invested into the tune of tens of millions of dollars for the production of asick fabs that will reach the hands of consumers. And that's a good thing. Derek J. It's unlikely in my view that anyone in the future will make a significant amount of money home mining. I'd leave that to the pros but it's becoming more and more affordable and easier to use. For example, I mentioned that I've got a couple of asick miners running behind me that are able to generate a couple of bucks in Bitcoin and it's not substantial. It's not a substantial amount of money but I think it's worth it for the education and for the fact that it's very low power. It's a very low cost to me but I appreciate being a part of the network and the fact that I'm able to mine, if not Bitcoin, something that perhaps is more valuable to me. Just switch the use of these things over to a different alternative currency and mine that. I don't care. I don't mine gold and silver in my house. I don't print Federal Reserve notes in my house. You know, I'm not really interested in mining and I leave it to the experts but something that occurs to me is looking at what the incentives have done. If you look at the leap in processing power as a result of the incentives created by Bitcoin, that technology can now be used to process other things. You can take these processors and you can make, I have no idea what the computer industry will do with this technology but you created the incentive for it and suddenly we see light years leap forward in processing power and that's going to now be taken up by video games, by movie production companies, by who knows what they're going to use it for. But that's huge. That's a leap in technology. So I'm happy to see it and I don't know how it works. I find it very promising because at the end of the day, this investment is a sunk cost and it is a sunk cost that is going to weigh like an anchor around the neck of everyone who entered Bitcoin as an early adopter and keep them in the game until we can get the mainstream involved enough. So I love this because all of this sunk cost means no one's exiting the mining business in our area anytime soon and we're less likely to suffer from a dramatic collapse in hashing power that would lead to a infinite block time completion. So I'm very happy about this. This wasted money has been wasted in creating a solid foundation for Bitcoin and that's a great cause. Excellent analogy, Andreas. Wasted money, well worth wasting. I wonder if that's an obvious with the gold rush because if you think about like the California gold rush, everybody comes over here to get rich quick in the very beginning, but you know a few years into it after the sort of the gold, the sort of the flow of money has sort of dribbled down. People have invested all this money and mining equipment and that is also a sunk in cost and so they're going to look for other things to mine since they have the capital now. So I'm sort of curious whether or not you could actually look at them like literally analogously with the history of the gold rush. And even better yet by the time they're finished with their mining care, they look around them and guess what, there's a town, there's some roads, there's a railroad coming in and all of that got paid for by the gold rush. So even while we're doing this, we're also paying for publicity for Bitcoin and marketing for Bitcoin and new exchanges for Bitcoin and all of the other infrastructure. So even when mining fails, the money that's been sunk and all of the auxiliary activities just from the publicity is generated will still be there. Some will turn into ghost towns just like California and some will turn into San Francisco. I want to mention while we're still on the topic of Bitcoin mining, how easy it can be to just plug in and unplug some of these miners. The equipment is incredibly easy and so replaceable. We're not talking about scales of difficulty like mining for gold where cranes are needed and drills. This is something as easy as plugging in a USB and downloading a program and letting it run. And it doesn't get any easier than that. And once your equipment becomes obsolete or outdated, it's easy enough to unplug a USB and plug in the new model. So I think we're going to see these things around for a long time and I think we're going to see more democratization of mining as more and more people want to get involved at home. What I would like to see is some kind of a combination Bitcoin mining Wi-Fi station slash solar panel where the panel itself could just take in the sun, transform it into Bitcoin, produce some Wi-Fi, kind of an all three, maybe a lamp too. Well merge mining is a really important topic from that perspective. One of the technologies developed the last couple of years is the ability to do mining simultaneously for a number of different coins. So even if you're not productively mining Bitcoin, you can still productively mine a whole series of other altcoins such as name coin or devcoin or prime coin, pp coin, any other coin. You can't actually go and merge mine other coins simultaneously and that will help promote the health of all of these other alt chains plus it gives you an early entry into some of the systems that haven't been heavily mined yet. I think there's a lot more to be covered on altcoins, but for now we're going to move on to predictions. This is the part of the show where I put you on the edge of your seat and ask you to predict something because you didn't read the setup document earlier. Andreas Antonopolis, prediction. Satoshi Nakamoto will be the world's first trillionaire. Donnie Barker. Just any prediction anywhere and no, no, we're running out of time. I think Bitcoin is going to save the third world. Derek Jay. Bitcoin will alleviate homelessness in the US. And of course I got to write mine in advance. Online drug sites will continue to flourish. The FBI may have gotten one, but they'll never get them all. Controlling the internet is like a game of whack-a-mull. The moles keep popping up everywhere and no matter how many you whack, they just keep coming back. Oops, we're out of time. Until next time. Bye, bye.