I think we're live this time. In the new Google it says attempting to go live failed. Please try again. It's the best way to start any show. The Bitcoin Group, the American original. For over the last ten seconds, the sharpest Satoshi's, the best Bitcoin's, the hardest cryptocurrency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists, Blake Anderson from Facebook.com. Sasha got Blake. Hi everybody, thanks for having me. Bryce Weiner from Block Tech Financial. Thanks for having me back. Chris Ellis from the World Crypto Network. Glad to be here finally. Will Penguin from Topiki. Hi everybody. And Chris Dough Atlas from Anonymous Bitcoin Book. Hey everybody. And I'm your host Thomas Hunter from Mad Bitcoin. Here's today's top story. Issue one, PayPal partners with BitPay Coinbase and GoCoin. It's official, the biggest names in Bitcoin. And now the biggest name in online payments PayPal has announced partnerships with BitPay Coinbase and GoCoin, which will allow merchants to accept Bitcoin, Litecoin and Dogecoin. Through PayPal, has total Bitcoin merchant adoption arrived? I ask you, Blake Anderson. Well I think it's definitely positive news as far as adoption goes. It's really great to have the option to use these different things as we would like to. As far as total merchant adoption, I think that there's a lot of smaller businesses, which are the real nature of the foundation. Like the foundational nature of a capitalist labor theory market economy is going to be smaller businesses. So I'm still very excited to see the smaller businesses continue to adopt Bitcoin and have the entrepreneurial competitive spirit embraced by the decentralized payment network. But having these big payment systems that basically any business can use, and I think that bigger businesses will be the first to use them, will be able to do business on eBay and do different things that will help to be parts of their various different strategies. But I think it's good news overall, but I don't think that we should go quietly into the night just yet. Bryce Weiner. I think it's kind of interesting the range of businesses that are there. This is not like really a partnership. This looks more like spreading it around. I mean, Coinbase could have handled this themselves. They did overstock. Bitpay could have handled this themselves. It's kind of what they do. So I really don't know what I mean, gocoin? What is that? I think that's like, I don't really know what this means as far as Bitcoin goes. It's frictionless remittance. There's no anticipation that Bitcoin will be integrated into the PayPal system, but that you can send Bitcoin kind of sort of. You won't have a PayPal Bitcoin wallet, I don't think. So it really, are you going to send Bitcoin to an address and then get remitted to cash instantly? Because both Coinbase and Bitpay offer that service. So I don't really know how this is going to operate or what it's going to look like. And I don't think we should pop the champagne on it just yet. Agreed. It's very uncertain. Oh no, this could just be for people to sign up for Bitpay through Coinbase, which is one of the ways they've described it as. They would use Bitpay as a portal for Bitcoin. So we'll see how that goes. Chris Ellis. Well, I'm just trying to become an alcoholic. This is a new pastime for me, so I'm just here to get drunk, really. That's serious. That's not what the topic is about. Okay, so I think it's great. We've talked about it maybe 12 times now. I am actually counting on this show. And I think it's fantastic user adoption, but it's not my main focus of good and serve the Bitcoin as I've said before. Well, yeah, I just echoing everybody else. I think it's not been mentioned that this is such a great sign for folks on the outside of this space. I certainly think that is probably the biggest positive net effect from this announcement that folks on looking waiting to see reputable businesses involved in payments more specifically, get closer to adopting or accepting or integrating Bitcoin in some way-shaped or form. Bryce pointed out, I think it's really interesting that they are spreading it around. They're giving a chance for each of the so-called payment processing giants for lack of a better word in this space to have a crack at integrating with them. And let's remember, it looks like a lot of fanfare and a lot of noise and a lot of hype, but it's really just baby steps. One of the biggest signals that it is just baby steps for PayPal is that they're giving each of the, they haven't chosen a winner among Bitcoin base and Gocoin. They, they maybe not don't need to and that's a good strategy too. But that's clear that they're really hedging against any and all risks as much as they want to look to anything that's notable or newsworthy to compete with Apple Pay or other payments innovations that are on the horizon in the tech space. So it's definitely good overall. It's certainly good for folks who have been criticizing Bitcoin or minimizing it or who have a limited or little understanding of the technology and their just armchair quarterbacking. About, you know, it's like non-biability or as a currency or whatever to see PayPal jump in is a great sign for them, gets them to raise their eyebrows and reconsider. But these are just baby steps when PayPal has a Bitcoin wallet right next to their consumer fiat wallet. You know, that users can choose between. That's when we'll see that maybe the 180 merchants who are accepting PayPal really start to see more more commerce done in Bitcoin. That's a good point. Well, it definitely gives us a chance to spread the word to all the people that use PayPal. But it is just baby steps like what about Bob? Kristoff atlas your thoughts. I think for me, the main way that this is significant is just being able to attach Bitcoin to the PayPal brand. PayPal is something that people are very comfortable with at this point around the world when it comes to moving money around. And so to see that Bitcoin logo and the ability to use Bitcoin somehow and concert with PayPal, I think it just adds to not the legitimacy of Bitcoin, but just makes people feel more comfortable with it. That it's not just this magical nerd money that maybe sort of has value and is kind of this amorphous strange thing to them. And I think it's fantastic that people are going to be able to get more comfortable with Bitcoin. This to me is not the real Bitcoin. You know, using Bitcoin through PayPal is not the real Bitcoin experience. It's going to be a highly controlled, highly streamlined, simplified process. But perhaps people getting more comfortable with just the idea of Bitcoin and seeing it being used will make it more appealing for them to actually really use Bitcoin in the future. Excellent point. Exit question, which company will PayPal buy first? Bit at Coinbase or Blake? Well, and information technology project management and when you're going through and trying to see what it is that you go to multiple different vendors and then you see what they're going to be able to Blake, because we have internet connection problems, we'll move on to right. Which company will they buy first? You know, I think a purchase is, I mean, you know, that of course, of soons that they will buy one and I think that's a pretty good opportunity. I think that that might even be, now that you mention it, that might even be the reason why they're testing the waters with all three. I would have to go with BitPay just because they have the most aggressive acquisition ability for Bitcoin in the space. They'll be highest volume remittance and they actually, I mean, you can collect Bitcoin all day along with BitPay. So if you're looking to get into the space and make that commitment, I think BitPay is probably the best contender for it. BitPay is also very attractive because they're payroll feature. Bitcoin and payroll, the money that no one's looking at. Chris Ellis, which company will they buy? I think Apple Pay is going to buy them all. Will Pagman, which company? I don't think any of them actually. If there was one I would agree with Bryce, it might be BitPay long-term. I don't see BitPay being willing to be acquired. Their fundamentals are incredibly strong. They're scaling fast. They're in a very impressive start-up in the space among very few very impressive start-ups in this space. So I think it may be many years before any of them get acquired, if at all. I think BitPay has plenty of capital. They were in the game early. They're well capitalized in Bitcoin and they've enjoyed massive appreciation over that time. I don't think they need... They'll raise rounds of funding because that's typical in the space and that helps garner acceptance wide scale. They want to get more partnerships involved. They want more venture capital firms and other kinds of funds involved with them. That just helps their overall health as a company. But I don't think any of them will be bought. I don't think Coinbase because their model is not strictly... It's not so much what PayPal does. They have a different model with the consumer wallet and the brokering, purchasing and selling Bitcoins to them. And Gocoin is small, although growing and maybe Gocoin will be the one because they'll be willing to get acquired because they're running third all the time. We'll see. I'm sure that BitPay will be willing to sell if to quote crusty the clown. They backed a dump truck full of money up to their house. Kristoff Atlas, which company will they buy first? I certainly don't have a lot of insight into the whole merger and acquisition process. And whether the existing investors for BitPay would want to be bought out by PayPal. I just don't know. Out of the three, clearly, it pays the largest, the most competent, the one that would be... If they bought them, they would be the ones that are ready to go right now. They don't have to do a lot of additional software development and hiring new people and all this other stuff. Persuaded by Wells Point about OK Coin, which is out of the three, which one would stand to gain the most? Out of that, which one would be the most easily persuaded to be bought by PayPal. And yeah, that's a possibility. Look, Anderson, one more chance. Which company will they buy? It's really fun to have a fiber optic internet service that you pay for at your home and then have the service level agreement turning a dog shit every time you're actually live and broadcasting. It's really exciting. It makes you really, really happy and just, you know, one that go on there and grab life by the horns and succeed. Man, it makes you really, really happy. But from a project management perspective, you've got multiple different vendors that you want to go through and Fed for what they're going to be able to provide, how much they're able to provide it for, what their institutions are like, what their employee base is like, what their management is like. And I think that if this is being done correctly, which almost nothing ever is, that they would look at these up to recalpenies as vendors, maybe to have software as a service or a SaaS model or they'll go through and try to buy somebody. I'm not sure which yet, but this is probably a betting process because very rarely do people buy a box where they don't know what's inside without vetting the different vendors that they're going to call into bed with. So I think that that's probably the stage that we're seeing unfold right now. It's a trick question. PayPal will buy all three companies. Issue two, federal trade commission file, civil lawsuit against butterfly labs. Inbattled mining company, butterfly labs had its wings clipped by the FTC over consumer complaints. Undelivered pre-orders that perhaps were pre-mining while the price skyrocketed and the consumers waited all from within a giant warehouse in Kansas. Are we rid of a giant scam or did the FTC just initiate a war against Bitcoin miners and Bitcoin mining manufacturers? I ask you, Bryce Weiner, is butterfly labs innocent? Should they be set free? Okay, this is really a complex issue because the reason is because Bitcoin is international. Whatever goes on in the United States in regard to Bitcoin mining manufacturers is actually impactful of the space. I think I discussed it on your show back in March. Bitcoin creates jobs. Every single mining manufacturer that exists are jobs that we're not there before and this is not like software. This is like actual manufacturing. And we talk about like roots of the economy sort of stuff here. So now in a downturn market, we have the FTC came down and shut down butterfly labs. Why? Well, okay. First of all, every single ASIC manufacturer minds with their own equipment before they send it to you. I know. Shock it, right? Oh, one of them. All of them. Everybody does it. And that's why Bitcoin miner prices continuously decrease. Not because the difficulty goes up or the price goes up. It's because they don't care because they already made their money so they can sell it back to you at straight material costs. This is how Bitmain is completely built their business. Good on them. Okay. They're, you know, awesome. They at least blow off their equipment before they send it to you because apparently K&C can't be bothered to actually like get a can of air and blow the dust out the collection them because that's how David Pate got his. So this is it a scam? No. Our mining manufacturer is disingenuous about returns. Absolutely. I think the first thing that gets regulated in this economy when when the shit actually comes down is going to be on cloud mining and mining manufacturers. That shit is going to get regulated so fast that because it's it could be a Ponzi scheme and you would never know it because of course the Bitcoin price, right? It goes down, hey, you lost money. You lost money. So it's just an easy excuse not to pay out the Ponzi scheme. But when the price goes up to a thousand, I think that you're going to see a definite a definite shift in the amount of cloud mining companies in the space. But beyond that, I think I think the FTC is on the right track. I think butterfly labs totally screwed the pooch. They they they were completely off on their contract applications. Everybody in this space knows that their components were overpriced even at the time because everybody knows what happens to the difficulty. Everybody knew this so it was just a sucker's bet. If you want to call it the first of the snake oil salesman of the Bitcoin gold rush, that's pretty appropriate. Chris Ellis. So I highly recommend this storeify by Firmumation on Twitter and he posted out and it basically collates all of the hashtag ask FTC comments that the FTC on Twitter address. So yay for government, yay for socialism, yay for regulators because in those steps and they've saved the day on being ironic. But I do like I am impressed with the way that the Bitcoin community is kind of showing short swift with a lot of these frauds. I was never a big fan of butterfly labs, I'll be honest. I thought it was dodgy from the get-go as soon when I first got into Bitcoin actually in 2013. One of the first things I did as I started looking up mine as everyone I suppose did back then. And one of the things I noticed was that the butterfly labs minus was selling for sometimes five times the price on eBay for cash delivery and that told me something was up. So I never really trusted them. I know it's easy to say that in hindsight but I wasn't one of those people that got coins for it and I'm glad that they failed because they never came across to me as being very honest. Will Aiman. Yeah, Bryce, Chris, agree with both of you guys pretty much said it all. You know what's done in the dark eventually comes to the light and Bitcoin accelerates this process all across the board. This is part of why I think so many of us have an affinity for it and are really accelerating as much as we can the adoption and acceptance of it. And bad businesses, bad actors, they actually fail and the ecosystem allows them to fail in this space. It's been about a year and a half, almost two years since folks knew of potential imperpriities with, say, butterfly labs or mining manufacturers in general. And you know, people continue to make calculated risks or maybe just foolish risks with making their orders with them. So as soon as you hear about a company who is producing a product and holding on to it, especially in the nature of an ecosystem much like Bruce described what these consequences look like, you can get away with everything and that's, you can get away with everything except looking like a shister. And that's what they'll be remembered for I think. I don't know if this starts some kind of massive campaign to overhaul the mining manufacturing process, but it might put some checks and balances automatically, organically in these companies so that maybe they can meet some more of their deadlines and satisfy a sufficiently decent number of their customers, unlike butterfly labs, which I think their customer satisfaction rate was under 50 percent something ridiculous for a while. So no company should survive if that's the case. I mean, they go out of business quickly. This is just a unique scenario because they're one of a few providers of some highly specialized product. So it's good. They're gone. They're will be gone most likely. And people will move on and the space will learn quick lessons from from this experience. Sorry, will we're gonna say something? Just that we hope they learn we learn lessons. Right. I thought maybe the most absurd part of this whole story was the response from butterfly labs where they said, oh, they're persecuting Bitcoin. This is the start of the Bitcoin persecution. I mean, I'm sure that the FTC will try to throw their monkey wrench into the gears of Bitcoin, just like every other government agency will. But I don't really see this as part of some kind of system like the beginning of some systemic persecution. They fucked up. They were a shitty company with shitty people running the company not delivering on orders. They've just been sucking up a storm for a while. And I've been amazed to go to some of these conferences and actually see people from butterfly labs sitting in booths at the conference is like, damn, those people have some balls or some really good cleaner to get the egg off of them when people start throwing throwing stuff at them. It's just, yeah, you know, don't don't don't don't you have this whole history about not delivering on miners, but check out our new hardware wallet. It's you know, it's hot off the presses. It's coming soon. It's going to be fantastic. Like that just that blows my mind that they have that kind of pluck and just, you know, plowing forward. So yeah, I don't really buy the argument. I don't see it as part of this persecution of Bitcoiners. I think they're trying to come up with excuses to cover up just bad behavior. It's a good point, Christophe. And the FTC did say publicly that they have not started war on Bitcoin or war on Bitcoin mining manufacturers. They did respond to butterfly labs as claims. Blake Anderson, your thoughts. Well, butterfly labs, initially people gave them a lot of latitude and a lot of slack because making hardware in this space is not something that's easy. I mean, to make new application specific integrated circuits that perform really well is not easy. But after a while, it became apparent that they were either running a scam or they were completely incompetent to the point where they couldn't make iterative project development baselines and then follow them and let people know where their products were trending and give people the information that they needed to make sound investments. I made various different Bitcoin investments when the price of Bitcoin was at about $8 to the USD and one of those investments that I made was in some butterfly labs mining hardware. And if I look at the money that I would have made by making a direct investment in Bitcoin instead of my BFL equipment from the time they delayed my shipment, they cost me $350,000 with their outright deceptions and lies. So I don't want to sound like, you know, just because I was personally affected, I hope that they rot in prison forever. But just because I was personally affected, I hope that they rot in prison forever. Let's all hope that the FTC will drink their milkshake. Exit question, when is it a good time to pre-order mine equipment? Follow up is now a good time for home consumers to purchase mining equipment? Brights. I pre-ordered mining equipment one time and that was hash fast. That ended up about as well as butterfly labs. I'm currently a litigant in their bankruptcy case. So no, it is never a good time to pre-order mine equipment. Go buy it off eBay. You have a better chance of delivery if you buy it off some single post guy in the forums, then you do actually pre-ordering from manufacturer. No way. Chris Ellis. Yeah, I agree. It's never a good time to pre-buy it. I'm just thinking, though, how do we decentralize it? That's a good idea. So we've talked about decentralizing the blockchain. We've been doing that with these things. So I've been given out, I've given out three so far that have gone across the world with full copies of the blockchain. But yeah, you're right. I don't know how you would distribute the mining. It's an interesting problem because the speed is going up so much because the difficulty describes the net, some total energy required to protect the network against fraud. So on that basis, obviously, fraud is a very energy-consuming problem. So let me think about that. But yeah, I think that the best solution that we've got so far is to buy it off of somewhere like eBay. And I'm sure as we all remember, by Tallyk Booter and Speech from Washington, you see that you lose 10% of your value in ship and ASIC. So there's a good thing, these things should not be shipped and they'll end up in the factory next to the factory where they're made, where I think about 25% of the half-hour is coming from right now. So we have a finite centralization problem on the horizon. And right now, he's looking into proof of stake for Ethereum. So that guy clearly doesn't know what he's doing in the minute. Will Pangman? Yeah, it's only a good time to pre-order, pre-buy mining equipment when you have a direct relationship with an officer in the company. And you can pretty much know where they live, guarantee delivery on time. That's the only time. Don't do it. It's not wise. Participate in Indiegogo campaigns for mycelium and their, you know, new products coming out or other such companies with people who have continually successfully delivered products to consumers in the space that benefit the consumers, that benefit the overall technology and help scale the technology. That's where you need to throw your support. The follow-up question, no, it's still no longer a hobbyist's game for mining. And I don't, I'm not convinced. Although I do see the centralization of mining problem getting worse in the near term and possibly also the medium term in the long term, I think there will be another fragmenting or fracturing that will redistribute mining hash rate more widely because of Moore's Law, because of, you know, various different metrics reaching asymptote. And it's probably a long way off, but it's going to get darker before the dawn. Kristoff Atlas. No, I mean, if you're at home, stay out of mining, a Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency and don't pre-order anything, that's it. Blake Anderson. Wait, how is anything going to get, how are any transactions going to get processed on the network if no one minds? I can't let that one slide. Large companies are going to be doing it for all-terristic reasons if you want to make money. Okay, okay, okay, that's a fair point. Is there some moment where I go all coins? I mean, you want to talk, pure coin? Come on, let's not talk about fake coins. Well, well, you want to talk about centralized blockchains. You're sending them around the world on a USB stick. Come on now. Let's take all of our coins on the network. But you just, I mean, you just now said you were talking decentralization of the blockchain and then held up the USB drive. Sorry, I'm like, yeah, but they get copied in lots of different locations. You pass the copy on your hard drive, you pass it on. How does centralized, I mean, you don't like, okay, we'll do that. How does centralized checkpointing work, but it's so bad? How centralized checkpointing work? That is so bad. Why isn't, well, you could actually make more money mining, pure coin than you'd probably good money, Bitcoin. Oh, I mean, I'm not necessarily against Bitcoin. I just didn't want to buy a bit of a conversation into something that was... Oh, no, no, no, no. I was just saying, I mean, if you were talking about from a miners perspective, they have options other than Bitcoin. Yeah, yeah. So I like about Bitcoin, just so we can wrap this up quickly. Well, I like about Bitcoin, is that it was a hybrid. Sonny actually invented proof of state. And it was a hybrid between proof of work and proof of state, which I agree with you is a much better hybrid system than a lot of these, like, oh, let's just do it all proof of state. Hey, Anders, should we order mining equipment? Well, I mean, it's basically for home consumers that are going to mine shop Bitcoin, I mean, right now, probably not the best idea you have to have, you know, quite steep power considerations, cooling considerations, air filtration considerations. I mean, if you don't know what a British thermal unit is, you probably don't want to mine Bitcoin at home. But I want to go back to what Bryce had said about all of these of very different mining companies using their hardware to mine Bitcoin before they send it to you. That might be true of the majority. And I would actually encourage him to make a list of the people that he knows that are doing that because I went and I vetted the operations at Cointera and their burn and tests are run on a separate network. And they actually have logs of all the burn and tests for each serialized individual number that are burned in on a separate test network. So Cointera might not be making as much money as they could be by being the only honest dog in the pack. Should you buy Cointera's new product that's not going to ship until next year early? I don't know if you should do that right now with the price of Bitcoin. But I do know that Ravie, who's the CEO there and is the former lead ship engineer for Samsung and also came from Qualcomm, said he knows what he's doing. Unlike BFL, that company knows how to actually make an iterative plan and follow through and try to deliver and then let people know if that's not going to happen. So should home miners buy Cointera equipment probably not. But if you're going to pre-order with somebody, I would say that the best luck that I've had so far is with Cointera. But even that being said, you know, from two Terra hash to 1600 giga hash was quite a dial back. And they had some problems, but they didn't do what Butterfly Labs did, which was to push out the delivery dates for 10 months. So, you know, take everything with a grain of salt and try not to settle for an answer that's overly simple, I guess. Moving on, did you know the Bitcoin group is broadcast on the world crypto network? It's a first of its kind collaborative multimedia platform that you can be a part of. We have public meetings, a collaborative workspace called a podio. We have ideas and new shows like the beta show and Bitcoin rush. We even have puppets on this week in cryptos. The only thing we don't have is you. Get involved today with the world crypto network. Issue 3, Bitcoin and Dark Wallet could be used by terrorists. So what? BBC Click, a hip technology show took on Dark Wallet this week, citing an unverified blog post that claimed the terrorist group ISIS was looking forward to Dark Wallet's release. Though BBC went on to negatively contrast Dark Wallet's use of technology with the fact checking journalist group Bellingcat, which actually sounds like the two groups maybe on the same side. Thanks to the hard work of open source journalists, Mr. Chris Ellis, the world crypto network is able to release the full audio and a transcript of the entire BBC interview, not just the excerpts used on TV. Was the BBC merely guilty of concision, time constraints based upon the length of their program, or did they intentionally intend to do a hip piece on Dark Wallet, casting the idea of using currency anonymously like cash as a terrorist activity? I ask you, Mr. Chris Ellis. Well, I thought it was the concision at first until I was working on the transcripts. Now, the transcript took about 10 hours, a man hours, in some total to complete and that was like a group of a spit here. You can hear it about 52 minutes. Let me just play this, okay? Now we're going to use you lot against you. That's the editor of BBC Click and we didn't know what he meant at the time. This was the banter after the interview. Everyone had kind of like gone off and sat in amongst themselves and I'd left my phone recording and I'd gone up to Jen and Simon to say how, you know, what a fan I was at the show because I've been watching it for years, you know. And for some reason, Jimmy, oh yeah, Jimmy Savile came up because I brought Jimmy Savile up. They said, oh, what is the Bitcoin with Peter Files? Like what are you going to do? And I said, what? Like Jimmy Savile, right? Like, you know, Peter Filio is existed before digital currencies came along. And this was something that Peter Todd repeatedly had to bring up with the interview as they kept pushing him for, they kept baiting him. They kept trying to get him to put things into that state into his statement. Like they kept trying to get him to say like, would you, would you say you're waging a political war like with the dark wallet to get him to repeat the phrase political war so that they could kind of fit it into the interview. And now we know that they already planned to juxtapose us with a company called Bellincat, which does the same fucking job as the World Crypto Network and I was there. So I ended up doing to BBC Click the very fucking thing that Bellincat was doing that they were trying to highlight on their show that they were trying to juxtapose. How fucking ironic. So we've had nothing back other than one email. I'm going to do a longer video on this. I've been scripting it. We've had one email from Simon, the editor, but nothing from Jen, nothing from anyone else. I just got one email back saying, look, sorry, sorry you weren't pleased with it. And we showed a positive one last time. And this time we had to add balance, right? The problem is that in media studies, that's the distinction between balance and symmetry. Symmetry is when you try to give equal weight to all sides of an argument, even if they're only like 1% of the argument, or even if it's a bullshit argument, you still give it 50% airtime. What they did was they gave symmetry not balance. Balance is when you say, okay, this argument is pretty weak. So we'll give it a little bit of airspace, but we're not going to give it 50 fucking percent of the airspace, especially when you're trying to argue as they do paciferously throughout. Bear in mind, you don't learn anything about dark wallet in the entire fucking documentary. All you really learn about is how ISIS could use it in some hypothetical situation, which of course philosophically speaking begs the question, because where did ISIS already get that funding from? They got it from the US dollar, right? So they'd funded themselves pretty well. And this was said throughout the whole thing, of course, that was left out now. In terms of Jamie Bartlett, Jamie Bartlett would like you to know that he has a book on sale. He can't shunning this throughout his entire fucking op-eds, wherever he goes. He wants you to know that he's got a book on sale. It's very well SEOed as well, so I'm not even going to tell you what it is. I'll let you work it out. It's really cryptic. Very well SEOed. And he compares dark wallet to Oppenheimer's famous quote, I am become death. That's right, everyone. Bitcoin is tantamounts the atomic fucking bomb. No, no, no, no. It's not cash. It's not cash for the internet. No, no, no, it's never been anonymous, right? It's never been anonymous to spend cash as Peter Todd repeatedly says. This stuff was always anonymous. And all we're trying to do with dark wallet, or they're trying to do with dark wallet, is return you back to the status quo. This is about defending moderate Western democracy. He must have said it. I haven't counted yet, but maybe 50 times. We're just defending moderate Western democracy. And they kept trying to push him. And the reason they kept pushing him is because Jamie Bartlett, the author of that article, wanted to say, or either said before, because they'd already interviewed him, that these are libertarian extremists. And whilst it's true that Amir probably is quite extreme in his views, I don't know, these libertarian, but he is fairly extreme in his views. That still doesn't undermine the fact that all dark wallet really does. In fact, why don't I show you now? And this can be my story of the day, because it was going to be, but it seems more fitting. So I have to confess that I didn't even use dark wallet for the first time until today, which is a bit bad of me really, because I should have done. And they should have done too, you know, BBC should have done. But nobody did. Nobody even asked how it worked. In fact, when I looked it up, I found that Bitcoin was the first project to use stealth addresses dividing up the private keys and putting concatenating two public keys together. Where is it? Let's see if I can find. I think this is my stealth address, but the usability on this isn't great. Yeah, this is my stealth address here. Yeah, that's it. So this is, this is two concatenated public keys together. Right? And the way it works is every time you can advertise this publicly on your Twitter, and every time someone sends coins to it, it goes to a new Bitcoin address. That way nobody looking into the blockchain can see how much you've made so far. Brilliant. Right? That all you're doing there is automating away something you could have done manually that would have been painstaking. It's not exactly going to fun terror. All you're trying to do is basically take away that social awkwardness you get when someone says, how much do I want to donate to this guy? What? He's raised six fucking Bitcoins? It's not getting that much. You know, like you, that's all it, that's all it really did. That was all they were arguing over for hours and hours and hours. That was it. That was literally it. It's pathetic. It's not even that groundbreaking really. It doesn't take us any further than cash. So I'm quite annoyed. I don't know how long I'm going to be annoyed for, but you're going to keep hearing about it until I get over it. But can I just say one more thing as well? It's I think Amir Taki is a genius. I think that he is a master PR guy. I think that he has played the BBC beautifully. Either they were in on it and they were both in on it and I'm just not smart enough to see that. Or Amir Taki has played them like a fiddle because as far as I can tell, that ISIS document, no one stands to gain more from the publication of that document than the dark quality in themselves. ISIS certainly don't have anything to gain from publishing a document that exposes their funding strategy. Nothing whatsoever. They certainly don't stand to gain anything by publishing it in English and using sales speak that seems to promote dark quality. So I'm not saying anything. I don't have any conclusions to make on it. I'm just saying who benefits and clearly whatever happened, dark quality have got some great publicity over the last seven days. Thanks to this. And I think the way you always record yourself when you're being interviewed. If you're being interviewed by someone that you think might take your words and change them, make your own copies. Hey, I've got a recorder on my phone. I've got a camera. I'm just going to set the corner so we have an independent record. One of the reasons we know about this story is Chris recorded independently with the actual transcript of what happened and we can compare that with what they actually published. Without a record, we can't do the comparison. We don't know as much. Will Pangman. Yeah, I think kudos to you Chris. I mean, a big reason dark wall it has this kind of publicity and that there's control over the kind of publicity they're getting somewhat from the community standpoint is a large thanks to you and recording in the first place and documenting with the YouTube video with that recording and doing up the transcript. So I mean, you're like, I really kind of got really excited when I saw that this was something you were able to do a few hours after I'd seen that footage and just you're like, you were like my hero last week, Chris. You're fearless and I'm inspired by you and I'm of course inspired by those guys in the squat as well. I mean, the fearlessness that they demonstrate and the fortitude of their ideology too, they're very articulate and it's tough. It's very challenging for these journalists to trap them and entrap them. So that's very encouraging because as we see more and more of these thinly veiled attacks or overt attacks against people, direct people in this space who are, as you put it, genius and contributing handsome technology and value to this incredible technology. That's crucial. So yeah, thank you so much, Chris, for doing that. I hope you've gotten great feedback from other people in the community. We should all be so appreciative that this was the foresight to record this. That's great work. All we need to say in response to claims that Bitcoin funds terror, Bitcoin's for child pornography, Bitcoin is for drug dealers is two things. One, with regard to ISIS, where did they come from? Let's talk about where they came from. And the other is, as soon as Bitcoin volume, it clips us dollar volume in all of these operations of these bad actors, then maybe there's something worth looking at or even approaches the event horizon of these massive, massively US dollar, Fiat funded atrocities. Maybe then we can talk and finish the interview. But until then, let's talk about where these guys got their, why aren't you covering where they came from and telling more people how they got funded and what they use for their main funding sources, regardless of what technologies they're looking into in the future. So again, thank you Chris. You're my hero last week, man. If only we could find those pallets full of cash, we went to Iraq. If only they weren't so small, just pallets full of cash. Christ off, Adlet's. All right. So what they're trying to do here is they're saying there are these guys that wrote this, the software and they're supposed to, they're somehow morally responsible for what people are using the software for. And in order to try and give that some legitimacy, they come up with this, they, they point out this, this blog post that's obviously fake. It's obviously not written by ISIS. If they had put a few minutes of research into this, they would have discovered that everyone who has had anything knowledgeable to say on the topic was identifying that it was clearly not authenticated document. So the fact that they would even bring that up is, you know, it really shows that they're not journalists at all. This is a link bait. I think fundamentally that's what the BBC Click stuff was about was was link bait and perhaps trying to sell copies of that guy's book. But that's it. I think that's an interesting proposition. The idea is what you do for your work is you're responsible for that. And if there are ill effects that happen down the chain, as a result of that, you are personally responsible for that. And society should be, you know, kept informed about what you're doing and judge you accordingly. Well, that's a principle that can be applied to the so-called journalists as well. So if they are creating proper dandepieces that cast dispersions on this technology that has potential to really help people, if they are playing the the parrot of these soldiers that want to go back into war, into a rock, and sedan, and everywhere else in the world, if they are doing this, if they are they are actively avoiding the truth and promoting this pro-war propaganda, which is essentially what that BBC Click article amounts to, then they are responsible for that as well. And perhaps they should be you know, I think it would be fair for people to throughout the idea that perhaps this editor of BBC Click should she be tried for war crimes? Where, you know, what kinds of you know, if we're going to hold dark wallet responsible for the possible fanciful, you know, plans of ISIS, then I think these people are much more accountable to the war crimes that will be committed using the US dollar and other fiat currencies than the dark wallet people are, and so they should investigate themselves. I'm probably the letter was on ISIS letterhead. So I just did something on something there because the problem is, Christoph, is that they would argue in defense that you are one of these libertarian extremists. And as you can see from Jamie, we do need to look at this properly, not maybe not on the stage show, but I'm on another show, can I just prime this up because they're going to take what you just said and said, look, he's an extremist. He's saying that the editor of some light entertainment broadcast should be tried for war crimes. And what you're not wrong though, that the bell and cat stuff that they showed was plagiarantly propaganda and this, right? It was clearly anti-Russia. Oh look, we've got a guy here, he by the way, he's a father and he's like, you know, really clean cut, really nice guy. And by the way, he's crowdsource some evidence that confirms that the book missile that shot down MH17 came from Russian territory. It does no fucking such thing, by the way. All the guys done is he's gone onto Twitter, he's found some fucking photograph and he's gone, oh look, it looks similar to that one that I saw in this other one. And then he's gone using check desk. Now don't get me wrong, all credit to him for whatever. Yeah, great, well done. But you haven't timestamped it, you haven't authenticated this stuff rigorously. I followed all these links on check desk. I think check desk is very interesting, we should definitely take a look at this. But on check desk's own website, it actually has the quote, but verification is the essence of journalism. How about that for some more fucking irony then? The verification is the essence of journalism, where is the verification in any of this? This was just PR. It was just it was a it was a put up job. And right now I'm not sure whether a mere was in on it or whether he kind of knew it was going to happen and just kind of let it happen because he thinks all publicity is good publicity. I think probably the latter. But for me, I'm just really angry that all this that that journalist just being used to pump a message and there's nobody's fighting for the truth. Well, look, I think that journalists, if they're going to talk about moral responsibility, they have a responsibility to learn about morality. It's not a difficult topic to to to learn about. I mean, there's a bunch of books out there, you can read them for free on the internet. And so the this idea that somehow the dark ball of people, they're going to be promoting terrorism that that they're going to be this collateral damage as a result of dark wallet is complete fucking nonsense. It's like there's this guy in a room with three other people and he's got a gun pointed at them. And he's like, you, you get naked and you you bite the head off of that that that live chicken. And then all these people are standing around there like, my god, did you see that guy got naked and the other guy bit that chicken? I can't believe that they did this. It's called the gun in the room. You put the moral responsibility on the people with the guns, not the people that are taking orders for them. And so the the fact that there are these these militants called ISIS that were created by the you know, the C I C I A of the US military and and all these other jack offs that has nothing to do with the moral responsibility of a mere talkie and Peter Todd. I mean, it's just it's it's complete insanity. The throw it out there as a possibility is just demonstrates a kind of level of moral naivete that is shocking to me. Blake and Tim. Well, it's very interesting that we've just all come to accept this blanket term of terrorism and what the fuck is that? What the hell are people talking about terrorism? It's going to be the engendering of an emotion of fear and we're going to make it against the law and commit to all of these resources to fighting it. And Confucius said a long time ago that the beginning of all wisdom is to call things by their proper names and you can't have a bright line law or a rule against terrorism that's insane. And some of the benefits of trying to talk in that way and frame conversations in this way is that you can say this software developer, something whatever equals engendering of terrorism, we're going to have this giant show about it and talk about it and have the BBC talk about it. And it's obscene, it's absurd, it's ridiculous, it gets us away from talking about Bitcoin and Dark Wallet and the code and what needs to be going on there. And I think that it's you know, the BBC playing into their government sanctioned scam of everybody has to talk about where terror is coming from engendering terror through the media while talking about they're going to stop it. And it's just it's just ass and I it's really discussing it makes me physically sick. Maybe the media could cover the media covering terror covering the media. Right. Right. No, no, no, that's right. That's absolutely right. Ferguson showed that we have to turn the cameras on the police now we have to turn the cameras on the journalists. Just to dub tail into that. Outside of CNN studios they had 5,000 people protesting CNN not covering Ferguson and CNN didn't even broadcast that and that was news happening right outside their own studios in Atlanta. So no, that you're absolutely correct. However, we go back to to dark wallet and all that. I'm a I'm an Amir Taki fan. Chris and I were talking about this for the show man when he's tired of living in that squad. I'll give him a job because I am one of those crazy libertarian anarchocapilists. I have no problem admitting that. It's pretty obvious from the stuff that that we do. I hate that word disruptive. So I'd rather use an anarchocapilist. You know, Amir has his own perspective on Bitcoin and he has his own perspective on the world. And this sort of thing is called distributed autonomous corporation. Mark Andreessen has to put up with people like me and people like Amir Taki because we are all in this space doing whatever the hell we want with Bitcoin. And that is really the thing that I think is so cool here. It doesn't matter if you like what Amir is doing or not or if the BBC is obviously run by pedophiles and changes the you know and edits the news if they're will. That sort of thing. I mean, that's really not surprising to me. But what is surprising is that you can't ignore one of the things that have been said about Bitcoin and cryptocurrency since it's very inception and that it belongs to no one. It belongs to everyone. And anyone who can understand the code can can you know implement it in their own way. And quite frankly, I love dark wallet. I'm going to fork it. I'm you know, as I've been made aware of Amir is all for that. I'm going to put it on every altcoin we have. It's a great wallet. I mean, just as a wallet, it's a great wallet. They should replace the Satoshi coin. And that's the truth about this anonymity technology. We need everyone to use it. We need everyone to encrypt their emails. They need to encrypt things that don't need to be encrypted. Even if you're buying something from Amazon or gift, you should just encrypt it because once we're all encrypted, we're adding to that traffic pool. And it's not just a bunch of criminals using the anonymity technology, which can be a huge fail. Moving on, exit. You can't be anonymous alone. Camp anonymous alone. Exit question. Yes or no. Should dark wallet be renamed Rainbow wallet? Does it seek this negative publicity or is it a byproduct of the state's hatred of the very idea of anonymity? Chris Ellis. I trust, I mean, I think he's doing the right thing. Will Pangman. What's the exit question? Should dark wallet be renamed? The provocation of that word is part and parcel of the project. It goes hand in hand. This is a statement. It's supposed to be disturbing to people. It's supposed to get people to think differently. It's supposed to evoke emotion. It's supposed to re instill a kind of courage and fearlessness that so many folks don't have and Chris, no offense. But I see this in, you probably wouldn't even take offense. But especially in English media, so much pandering to whosiness, so much pandering to whosiness and authority. And please let us be children of authority. Please let us outsource all responsibility to some mommy, daddy, or nanny of some kind out there. And this is provocative. People, you know, when Cody Wilson gets interviewed on TV about these kinds of concepts for long form interviews, not quick ones, but the one he did recently on Sophie and co on RT. The one he did about six months ago or five months ago on a British, it was a called hard line or something like that. Chris, you may know the show better than I do. But it's, these are fantastic interviews. And in them, they repeatedly tried to entrap and trap Cody, in this case, to reveal himself as some kind of like, no nothing or irresponsible person. And every single time he he and a mere, when a mere is in these interviews as well. And Peter Todd, from what I read of that transcript, have pre rehearsed and pre plan. There are three chess moves or six chess moves ahead of their opponents. And the Bitcoin space is thousands of chess moves ahead of its self proclaimed opponents. And that's good. And provocative things like this are great things. I mean, you know, dark wallet isn't out there to harm anybody much to the contrary. How can software, like open-source software harm harm somebody? You know, the the liberator pistol, for example, is not out there to harm people. It's out there to disturb people and get them thinking. It's a very terrible gun. It's a terrible gun. It's about how it shifts the argument. Yeah, it's, I said it's a badly performing gun, Neaming. Not lashing it's like a terrible gun. Oh my god, it's frightening. It's like, it's a gun functionally. It is poor, incredibly poor. And it's a bad product in terms of a gun product, a firearm. It's about what point it makes. It renders the debate irrelevant. It renders the debate of, do we need to be protecting everybody all the time and wrapping everyone in bubble wrap and wrapping their brains in bubble wrap all the time? And it renders that argument obsolete. It actually causes you to think, now I have to spend time if I hate guns and worry about the kid with a 3D printer across the street. Uh oh, now what are you going to do? Well, you're probably going to try to defend yourself if you think of the logical conclusion in that, in that quandary. And then you're back at trying to question your own previously held beliefs or your own standards for, for behavior or standards you want to impose on society. Man, if I have to protect myself with a weapon, maybe like a firearm, then I can't really be out publicly against these things or, you know, how can we actually ban these things if they're already ubiquitous as digital files? Uh, it's, it's, you know, and dark wall it does the exact same thing, but with Bitcoin. Uh, as Chris said, it's pretty harmless technology. All it does is, is bring Bitcoin the utility that we have with cash more directly. And these are just important tools to develop around this space. We need more iterations around Bitcoin technology, more apps that are like native apps on Bitcoin. That's exactly what dark wall it is. And so, you know, when folks are trying to sully, um, and, and drag through the mud, people and ideas like this, what it does is it tees up for us. If we are careful, if we are smart, if we like Chris and like a mirror and like Cody and like these other luminaries and, and all of us here, I think, as well, can see that golf ball teed up beautifully and nail it down the fairway 400 yards because it was put there for us to do so. Um, you know, it doesn't have to be an attack. It's not slings and arrows. It's a perfect opportunity to drive a strike and get under, you know, it's, it's a perfect opportunity for us to re-package the messaging around this whole thing and make the already discredited mass media further discredited. Clarification for the folks home, the liberator is the 3D printed gun, not to be confused with the peacemaker or any other pun. Christ off atlas. The name doesn't matter. Um, this project is going to be forged repeatedly. Um, once they kind of solidify things, there's going to be lots of Bitcoin clients out there. The technology, some of the code will probably be taken from dark wallet and put it into other clients that have all kinds of other names. We saw this with a dark market being forked into open bizare. It just, it doesn't matter. Blake Anderson. What's the question again? Should we rename dark wallet rainbow wallet? Does this hate dark wallet or does it just hate all anonymity? I don't know. I think that the branding campaign in the Bitcoin space and altcoin space has gotten completely out of control and we've all moved away from doing what we should be doing to help submit bips. And I think that dark wallet internet itself is working outside of the Bitcoin white paper scope. They're trying to bring anonymity in a way that is kind of forced as opposed to the natural anonymity that should be engendered when enough people come into Bitcoin and it's robust enough to support all this different stuff. I mean, when you have orders of magnitudes of more addresses being made all the time, then you don't have the anonymity of the audit becomes impossible. When we go off of that, we continue to try to do things which take things into our own hands and then brand them and market them until they finally work. I think it's a really backwards way to do things. And so I don't think that it matters what we call it. I think that if they work something out that is really valuable, I hope that it gets engendered into various things that go forward. But I think that there's a lot of talking going on and not a lot of doing and that makes me very anxious. Bryce, you know, should we shoot some rainbows? You know what? I'm going to fork a pastel version and release it just because. And that's like Chris was saying and is Kristoff was saying, the proliferation of this technology and as many forms as possible is really what's important. And you know, Taki is being ridiculous. And I think it's really like a bunch of PT Barnum showmanship and good on him for getting the BBC to play along because Dark Wallet is a great wallet. Okay? This whole pockets thing it has, great accounting in this wallet. However, for criminals, like a criminal is going to keep this electronic accounting record of all of their criminal transactions, even though they sent them all anonymously. It's really ridiculous. Ellis has the wallet up on his screen now. This, the wallet itself is fantastic and he should be really be commended for an excellent design. But the fact that this fosters anonymity is really just a sick joke for marketing. It's really genius, I think. I wanted to say one more thing. You know, I'm not recounting what I previously said, but there is a beautiful genius in the provocation style of like Cody Wilson. And Amir Taki is just more reckless maybe in a not evaluative, but in his approach with PR. Cody, everything he's done all his projects are on the up and up. You know, he's made sure he's done them legally. And you know, when he's challenged on what are the consequences? Like, look, everything I've done, I'm, you know, a file, all the paperwork, everything's clean and good to go. It's your laws that suck. And that's really what he's exposing. It's there's, there is an importance. I think there's lessons you can learn here from like Skype when they were starting out and they were facing lots of regulatory burden and overreach. And they really manipulated language to their advantage. They use the existing language around these laws and around what they would eventually fight with the, you know, the telecom companies trying to regulate them out of existence. And they totally said, well, you know, we're not actually a telecom. We're a software as a service. And, you know, every, every definition that was trying to, that was the regulatory regimes would try to stick on them to crush them. They redefined, repackaged quickly and easily, very nimbly. It was very artistic and beautiful. And the way that they did this, there's some really great articles and I think blogs from the CEOs or the former executives of the company talking about how they did this. That's something projects like Dark Wallet or Bitcoin companies in general, even the ones who are supposedly on the up and up, but probably will face some some indictments in the future here. That's something they can all learn from is using, you know, co-opting the language for their own advantage. Very good. Moving on. Issue 4. History is happening. Juice, wrap news is using hip hop to transform the news. Is YouTube more than a collection of cat videos? Is it a force for social change? Do channels like juice, wrap news, the fucking news, mad bitcoins and the world crypto network provide more than just entertainment? Can they actually provide the truth? If the medium is the message and it always has been, is it capable of being truthful? And can we bring this, can we use this truth to bring about social change? I'm laying it all out on the line here with this question. Can YouTube change the world? Will Pangman? I think if they change the way incentives work for advertisements, for revenue, for the content producers and do something maybe integrating Bitcoin to perhaps upvote good quality comments and get rid of trolling, then yeah. Kristoff, at least. Yeah, it already has. YouTube is just a way of connecting people in a more peer-to-peer fashion, exchanging ideas, information and all that stuff. It's the natural progression from the printing press to all the things in between. And of course there are things that we can do to improve YouTube around, including Bitcoin and Change Tip and all that other kind of good stuff. But yeah, it's been doing that for a long time. I've been getting the majority of my information through mediums like YouTube for years at this point. Blake Anderson. Yeah, I've been rambling against unilateral communication for a long time. I think it's important that people can comment and respond to articles every time I see a modern digital publication that is an article with no area for comments at the bottom. I was like, who is running this disaster? There's no place for comments. So I think that YouTube, if we can get a situation where people can talk back and forth and make shows and then come on each other's shows and that we're going to have a decentralized system of communication and entertainment instead of all this unilateral programming that everybody's depressed and on antidepressants and gets all these messages about war, death and genocide and Ebola and all this shit. That's a nightmare. That's nightmare shit. We need to start to get away from that and realize that negative programming affects you negatively and positive programming and working together in collaboration really makes people feel better because you can feel the traction of shit actually getting better instead of just being entertained to death and to your grave. I think it's good. I think that everybody should join the World Crypto Network and donate and work together and become part of the shows and that we should usher in a good version of the future. Price, Tweeney. I think there should be more boobs on YouTube. I think you should should allow porn and I think that until they stop editing content it's all just so much bullshit. Chris, Alex. Yeah, I'm actually really optimistic about BitTown. I'm looking forward to this becoming a little bit more mainstream so I'm really into Torrance again. I don't know why I just suddenly got into it because I think somebody sort of said to me that they've got Merkel trees in there. I was like, oh cool really. And so I started looking to start putting everything up there because I just like the fact that it's distributed. And so now this app, apparently this open source project on GitHub by Feros is claiming to stream video through a web browser with no plug-in required. Just straight up through the web browser it will stream you a video torrent. And I want us to do this on the World Crypto Network as soon as it becomes feasible. I'd like us to really do this because I don't think we should be dependent on the YouTube's great as far as it goes but it has been known to shut people down. People control you. They can also they can also petition for you to be taken down and YouTube just take you down automatically because they got like 10 different IP addresses to say that you had inappropriate content. So I really like I really like you know like this kind of thing and I'm also a big fan of Juice Wrap Media. And it's not even just torrent anymore. It's magnets that get you the torrent. Magnets. How the fuck they were? We've been publishing the magnets in fact this isn't the next story about this lady that blew the whistle on the Fed and I've now uploaded that to torrent. So it's now immortal. Very cool. Exit question. Yes or no. And this one's for the viewers at home too. Will you help me change the world with YouTube? Will payment? Yes. Kristoff Atlas. I'm in. All right Blake Anderson. What was the question again? To say yes. No. No. Brian's winner. Take your shirt off. They're saying that now. Chris Ellis. I think I'm going to quote Camus and say you can't change the world but you can change the way people think. And I'll quote Groucho Marx. I wouldn't want to be a part of any club that would have someone like me as a member. Moving on. Issue 5 bonus issue. Federal Reserve links leaks tapes. Federal employees were told not to ask questions, not to regulate banks. A culture of failure. New tapes from me with inside the Federal Reserve played just this morning on NPR's This American Life show the realities of regulatory capture from with inside the Federal Reserve. The organization that's intended to regulate banks has a deferential attitude to the banks it's supposed to be regulating and believes that perception is reality arguing against the lawyer who leaked the tapes and who is used to living in a world of evidence and hard facts. The regulator claims that it's going to question Goldman about a shady deal that takes place on Christmas Eve in Spain where Goldman would hold debt for the Spanish bank artificially inflating their capital. The Fed's own words making them look better to their local regulators. I.e. what the rest of us call lying. The contract included that the Fed would sign off on the deal but the Fed did not sign off and the deal was signed anyway. How could the deal be completed without the Fed? The Fed barely asks them the question during the meeting and takes no further action. The Fed is now liable for Goldman's Spanish deception. Carmen Cigara, the insider, describes the Fed as an organization with the ability to be a good regulator but it chooses not to use this power like a giant afraid of its own strength. They have endless meetings with no action items with the attitude that simply holding the meeting they've solved the problem while in reality nothing is done. Miss Cigara discovers to her absolute shock that Goldman Sachs has no firm wide conflict of interest policy and even after 12 meetings the Fed still won't require them to make one and instead buyers Miss Cigara leading to a wrongful termination suit that so far one judge has thrown out because of a technicality. Miss Cigara has filed an appeal. Has the Federal Reserve the organization tasked with regulating the banks been completely taken over by the very banks that it's designed to regulate? Is this the ultimate example of regulatory capture? Is there nothing standing between American consumers and another financial collapse like the one of 2008? Christoph, atlas. I listen to this American life episode. They put it up on the web this morning and it's a great podcast. They're great at editing and putting the story together and they make first some captivating stories and the main thing that you get from this story is that they have these inspectors that work for the Federal Reserve. They work in the same building as these different banks like you have your Bank of America inspector and your JP Morgan inspector and they're their co-workers with all these guys. They've done such an unclear mission that they're actually primarily motivated to just have happy co-workers. They don't want to accept them because then the uncomfortable one when they walk by them to the water cooler. Basically, what you get an image of is these people, these inspectors, they want to work for a bank and so they put in their three years of non-petitive, non-regulatory behavior and then they apply for some jobs out of bank and then they get the job. That's the purpose right now of that position and of course when they ask the Federal Reserve what do they have to say about it, they're like no, that's not how it is. What else are they going to say? But I think it is important to point out that what NPR is also very good at doing is saying these people over here who are being violence, they're not being violent the right way. They're not regulating the right way that what they need to do is they need to get some regulators in there like this Hispanic woman and she kicks some ass. She asks the hard questions and sticks it to the banks and that's totally not the answer whatsoever. You would have some other form of corruption, some small tiny variant of what exists there currently. The problem is the initiation of violence. The Federal Reserve should not exist, we need to end it, we need to, and I think the best way to do it is not through any kind of political change or by hiring the right inspectors or getting them fancy badges or uniforms or anything along those lines. It is Bitcoin, right? We move ourselves, we remove ourselves from that whole system, we, you know, flee the dollar, we head into cryptocurrencies and use currencies that are structured and regulated by a math rather than corrupt human individuals. And I think that's the answer but that's something that's not captured by the, you know, the NPR group. For the record, her boss at the, her boss moved on to work for GE Capital. So exactly what Christa was saying did happen in this case when we're for another bank. And she applied to a bunch of places herself, like 20 different places and she got rejected by all of them of course because she's not like trying to make nays by the water cooler. And it was great when they tried to use that evidence that she'd applied for job against her as if that was a some kind of sign of failure. That was a great, great decision. Dick Anderson. Yeah, when you have regulators that are going to regulate a market economy, the first things bought in sold are the regulators. So the fact that things are regulatory captured and happened since 1913. And this is just an illustration of the fact that this was the first example of the most important thing to capture in the media and all that other shit that's a symptom of this is just, you know, a symptom of it. So we have a situation where all of our medium of exchange is captured by these sadistic pieces of shit. And then we have, you know, national propaganda radio come out and be like, oh, well, we can come in and we can be non biased. We're not just going to be a mouthpiece for these people that are enslaving all of you. We're going to act like we actually care that the Federal Reserve is doing all this stuff even though that, you know, anybody in a position and other ask from a whole on the ground knows that NPR National Propaganda Radio is going to have a vested interest in protecting this system and being the most captured voice of propaganda. So instead of being like, okay, we're just like a liberal mouthpiece, which is what they are, they try to act like, well, no, we're going to go and try to make it so that the government works because we believe in the government and we're liberal so the government is going to work. So instead of, you know, coming over to any kind of a side of reason and saying, let's have free ability to move and interact and marry and smoke drugs and put things in our body, social freedom, then having, you know, economic conservatism where it's not like, let's be liberal with the stolen loot of money and be liberal with a number of bombs that we put out on people, they're going to continue to try to act like, oh, we're going to have this balancing act of where you can either have one or the other, but you can't have both, you can't have libertarianism. So I just don't know how the people that work at NPR can go on with a straight face after listening to this piece that they put out on a Friday, which is where you want to put something if you wanted to sink down into the ether and have nobody listen to it. But I thought the better reserve was great. I thought I could do no wrong. I mean, I think that maybe NPR should go back and revisit some of the stuff they've said in the past about how fantastic government is and how we all need to get in there and get our own pet bill and push it through with the expense of the taxpayers. I mean, I think that they need to look at some of the stuff they've been promoting for a long time. If this story is something that they want to produce and have people fund NPR with their consumer donations to continue to have great pieces like this. It's a good point that it's not really even NPR that brought us this story. It's the whistleblower herself. If you see bad things going on in a company you work for, even if it's the federal reserve, you should tape it. You should do what she should go to the spy store get a little recorder, put it on your keychain. And when something bad happens, create a record of it. You never know, you might be it later. They might kill you or charge you with wiretapping. I mean, I would be careful with giving advice like that. We live in some pretty dangerous times and not a lot of people like to admit that. And what if, for example, someone who upload it to a bit of time and maybe I don't know, maybe put it in the blockchain. So that magnetic link and corresponding hash could just be permanently, permanently put on the internet. And you'd never know who did it. And in fact, you can send that to me in my bit message. And I'd never know it was from you. And following the example of Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning, we should all be leaking these things. Yes, there are consequences. Yes, there are threats. And you should do the best to really manage those. But you can do what we can. We can change this. Brass, go ahead. Chelsi Manning, by the way. I know. It's hard. So I got to say, okay, federal reserve, got a federal reserve. I mean, like this should surprise anybody. First of all, second of all, it's a little bit disingenuous for the corners to criticize the federal reserve because Bitcoin, like, okay, right here, economic policy, general December 11, 2013, courtesy of Jeremy Ross, 927 people on half of all the Bitcoin in the world. That's just, that's just fat or some charts for you. That's just fat. That's indisputable fact. That's actually more people that are actually less people, excuse me, than attended the Builderburg Group. So when we talk about, like, corruption, newsflash, Bitcoin is corrupt as hell. And if you don't believe that it isn't, we can go and look back at the Bitcoin foundation elections and how we almost had to call in you and observers. Because we had to say, I heard it. It's not heard just a second. Is it 927 people, human beings, or 927 Bitcoin addresses, because that's not the same thing. You know, I actually just closed it. It was a statistical analysis based on the number of wallets. I actually, you can actually calculate the number of users on the Bitcoin network. I mean, believe it or not, I can actually, I actually can show you a picture of the graph. We can actually do this. And we've actually, Cal Abel of Stanford University. In fact, created the grams that can analyze the blockchain and do so in a very, in a manner consistent with statistical economics that actually outlines the number of participants, actual participants, not wallet addresses, but actual participants based on spending behavior on the Bitcoin blockchain. That kind of stuff is out there. We don't ever want this stuff spoken about, I guess. Nobody ever wants to say that it's possible or that it could happen, because then the mystery goes away, because then people can do things like price discovery. And all of the stuff that people like to throw out there that Bitcoin is good for, suddenly it doesn't really look all that good because we can have numbers to analyze what's actually going on. And, you know, Marty Andreessen is aware of this. Cal Abel and I talk about it. There's a lot of people who know this about it, huh? Is aware of what? The types of calculations that can be done in the Bitcoin blockchain, as far as statistical analysis and economics and statistical economics, in order to determine the exact syntax and velocity of an individual Satoshi of Bitcoin, as well as the number of actual participants on the network. It's not like impossible. There's a bridge that's being jumped over there, going from one thing that you're talking about to identifying individual people and that last part to jumping over to identifying exactly how many people in control of wallets. I'm having a really hard time understanding how that would be even remotely possible. I appreciate that. However, I'm going to say math and I'll send you a link after the show. I'm not going to bother Google in it right now, because I use the software all the time. In fact, I even sent you a picture of it. We use this stuff. We can apply it to, and we do, we apply this to blockchain all the time, and we can tell exactly when a network is going to hit critical mass. In fact, none of them have with Bitcoin. Let's say hypothetically that there was just a few people that had a lot of the big coins. Why would that imply corruption? I'm sorry. It implies centralization, which of course, there's a limited number of individuals that can control the Bitcoin price. Just a few weeks ago, actually, before crypto-aligner, that was a big issue, because the Bitcoin price was tanked, because it was quite obvious it was two wells having a pissing contest on BitFinix. Everybody wanted to blame BitFinix for it, but they kind of glossed over the fact that these are two individuals who are executing these trades against each other. It's really not, I mean, this is like the gun in the room argument that they'll over again. The corruption was actually a different issue, because I would like to ask the Bitcoin Foundation why they didn't use a damn block chain to do their voting. Why do they have to have three elections? Sorry. I agree that Bitcoin has centralization issues, but the number who has control over the big coins, like that to me seems completely irrelevant to that calculation. I'm trying to understand why you're calling out... Oh, I can make it really easy for you. The Satoshi wallet. That's the most obvious example. If the Satoshi wallet dumps the price of Bitcoin is $10. All we have to get are guesses and supposition that the Satoshi wallet can't be used, but nobody knows that for certain. You can't prove a negative. You can't prove that the private key is no longer exist. That is always going to be there. That is always going to be a problem for Bitcoin price discovery until the day that it actually goes up so far that when that wallet dumps, it won't matter. That's like years from now. That's pretty different from the Federal Reserve. We would also have a massive amount of collusion in Bitcoin. Are you kidding? I mean, the when Mt. Gox crashed, you had Coinbase, BTC China, in circle, all releasing this joint statement which was pre-prepared in hours and let's not after Mt. Gox crashed. Let's not forget that BTC China is in China, which is 12 hours off Eastern Standard Time. It was a totally different time of day. They must have been awake, maybe waiting for Mt. Gox to crash because they knew this was going to happen. The statement was prepared ahead of time. These cartels exist. The control and the collusion and price manipulation exist and it's people that are low in love. They're well-bounded. Of course. There's like a 13 million Bitcoin limits on the total supply of Bitcoins that can ever exist. That limit on the supply doesn't exist with any Fiat currency. So what? There's really no limit on Bitcoin. If the Bitcoin, let's check this out, right? Coin, Terra, and K&C are both members of the Bitcoin Foundation and they make miners and they have these large mining facilities. Everyone always likes and they produce Asic miners. So let's say the Bitcoin Foundation wants to add 100 million Bitcoin to the system. This is actually something that Fortune magazine had suggested. What if the Bitcoin Foundation turned evil? Not going to happen. See, you can say that it's not going to happen. You know what, guys? Spit out the Kool-Aid. From the increased, the most effective. It cannot happen. I'm sorry, that's absolutely ridiculous. We are doing the all-break it all the time. Bendered by people that have their money into a system which would destroy that same system that they put it into. So you have from an information science perspective, you have pragmatism and antipragmatism. Then you have social anthropology and then you have the 51% attack versus other things that can happen. It can't step outside of the laboratory. It's not. It's not only has it happened, not only can it happen, but it has already happened a dozen times over. And the only thing difference with Bitcoin, with many coins, the only difference between those coins and Bitcoin, people call it Bitcoin. Because the amount is the amount of Bitcoin is a shit coin. That's why shit coins exist. Because it's centralized and the Bitcoin Foundation is full of corruption. I mean, that's why I exist. The Bitcoin Foundation is not Bitcoin, though. I agree. I agree. The control has a bit of... Whoever controls the repo controls the coin. I don't care when anybody else says. The manufacturer's of mining equipment are on the Bitcoin. There's not just one. He procures. Exactly. There's five agencies. If you have to come together in concert to make an antipragmatism. Let's see. Okay. So let's talk about the whole PayPal thing and go coin. Remember the Bitcoin Foundation, Coinbase, member of the Bitcoin Foundation, BitPay, member of the Bitcoin Foundation. Okay. We're seeing a pattern here. We're the Bitcoin Foundation. I got an action about that. I got an action about that. I got a joint at Bitcoin Foundation. Sounds pretty sweet. That sounds awesome. It's a great deal. 100 million Bitcoin is to Thomas. All right. I'm just waiting for this leaker to be called a leaker to be arrested, put in jail, gag ordered, and crimes be charged to her, and she'll be put away. Everyone will forget about the crimes that might be charged to some of these other, you know, too big to fail type of entities. And we'll all move on and nothing will happen to, you know, Goldman Sachs, their share price, or the Fed in their, you know, monopoly. Can I just point out that she's a polyglot and she's a whistleblower? That's pretty cool. And I just want to let you guys know in the past about five seconds or so since this broadcast actually went out. I want to show you this really quick. Bitcoin price just crashed. So I'm going to take credit for that. For that little look, for that little outburst right there, for that little red line right there. Sorry. Go ahead. It still looks like 400. It's not that bad. Chris Ellis, everything to add about the whistleblower. Other than that you have a crush on that. I had shit tons to add, but it was like, God, it was like, Trulla-Lalala, you know, and I was on Twitter and people were tweeting me. I thought it was brilliant. And I put it up on BitTorrent, and as soon as someone finishes downloading it, I'll put the magnetic link on the blockchain. Sorry, I won't. An anonymous person will, and I'll just announce it later. So not me in other words. No, I thought she was brilliant. Well, what did she say? How? Let me just show my event really quickly. So I really liked the bit where she said the Fed said to her credibility at the Fed is about subtleties and perception as opposed to reality. So what she is is she is basically doing the job of your Bitcoin Qt client, your Qt client, your Satoshi client that was mentioned a lot there by Bryce. She is independently verifying the transactions of the banking system, but she's doing it manually. Yeah, yeah, yeah. She's going through everything manually and she's having to check it. And all she's doing, like any honest person, is she's calling bullshit, but like most honest people, she's not compensated. And that has to change. And of course, the big values and innovation that Satoshi came up with was that honesty should pay more than fraud. We've got to reward the behavior we want to design for. And that's what I have to say. Isn't that a question? In subtletie, the modus empire and dye of the dollar as well that it has nothing to do with reality that it's about, it's all about perception. It's backed by the perception of the US military and the strength of the resolve of the US to meet its debts. Yeah, but this is cryptographic. Go ahead. This is cryptographic proof. So you can't deny that you've got infinite traceability on the blockchain. No one in the world is going to disagree that it refers to it. So. And remember that the job of Zafi people rocks not to actually run the galaxy, but to distract people from those who are actually running the galaxy. Will makes a good point that the most important thing about this story is that nothing changes. So nothing should change. Everyone keep doing what you're doing. Goldman Sachs hands off. Do what you want. Moving on to questions and answers. I'm afraid even look. Maybe it's not loading. Maybe there are no questions. Maybe there are so many questions that the little box won't load. But we're going to try to do about 10 more questions. Definitely going to start with infinite videos. How drunk is Chris? I don't know, but the effort started accelerating. Moving on to the next question. Charles. I don't know. Practicing of becoming an alcoholic. Okay. Last time. Perfect. All right. Just practice. Add says Christian to another show after last call. There we go. Brandon brings a great point about the South Park season premiere. Go fund me. One of their funniest episodes in years. I've watched it twice. I would love to watch it again. And remember that in the episode, ISIS is not using dark wallet. They're using the Washington red skins to create crowdfunding. Yeah, it would have been great if they tied altcoins into the episode. That's a little hip for them. But great job by South Park. Everyone should see it. Take down of the NFL as well as startup companies. Something for everybody as usual. The Bitcoin rat is in the audience. Hello, Matt. Moving on. Infinite radio. I heard a couple is getting married on the blockchain. How are they doing this? More importantly, they're already married. Who cares? But they're doing it in Florida and they're probably going to write it into the blockchain. Have you ever seen something or something? Yeah, dude, we're trying to run through your questions. I've been married on the blockchain a few times. I'm all into it. Yeah, and we'll learn to that. How do you get divorced? What a push. What a push. What a pull. You can't get divorced. It's a one-way irreversible transaction. Man, it's a distributed time stop server. Yeah, and I've already got one x-wife. That's not going to work. It's immutable that you can make, you know, additions. No divorce for blockchain marriages. Yeah, you just have to keep your eye on more parts. We can make it fun. We can say that's incentive to murder. Oh, the ultimate end of line. No more code. The Henry VIII divorce. From crypto gaming network, media is there to distract from the truth. They are the true terrorist behind digital curtain of deception, keeping the populace in a zombie state of ignorance. Excellent point from crypto gaming network. Let's see what else we've got here. From James. Loading, loading. How important of ten would it be for everyone involved in crypto to read through the transcript and look at Simon's comment, though one they mentioned was not the only comment worth seeing to see what type of journalists there are out there. Jen was merely a high-paw. It's important for everyone involved in crypto to first of all make your own record so that we have a verifiable separate copy of the interview. Just say, hey, I've got a voice recorder out on my iPhone. I'm going to push record. A lot of people, if you use Google Voice, you can push three to record whatever is coming on your phone call. It even says this call is being recorded, which is what you do if you're really polite about it or in the state of California where it's illegal to record people without their permission. But everyone should make their own backup copy, regardless of whether you trust the journalist. Anyone else want to talk about how important it is? Throw it around. Chris. I think this will change a lot of things. If the journalist knows you're going to be recording the whole thing, it will make them think twice about the kind of questions they ask because clearly you can tell from the full edit that they're deliberately trying to bait Peter Todd into making. I was particularly angry because Peter Todd isn't actually that extreme. He's pretty moderate and he's very easy. He's not as kind of, he doesn't have this kind of flamboyance and this kind of charisma that Amir has. He's just very kind of thoughtful and philosophical on his point. Well, until you ask him about Monero and then it totally changes. We can do that. He was very spirited and outspoken in relation to that kind. So it was like uncharacteristic. What I mean is he doesn't say, we will loan the money. I think it's great that terrorists are using dark wallet because it means we're doing a job properly. He won't come out with these sound bites that they can easily edit into. Oh no, that was my point. He's so mellow and solo key to that. He's not going to crack it. Alpers are very uncommon. Right. Moving on to the next question from Jim Bean, probably a close personal friend, Chris, YouTube, the centering loads of channels committed to telling the truth about the geopolitical situation. We shouldn't rely on them. We need a decentralized video platform somehow away from the corporate madness. I agree. But where is that platform? The WebBorx system, the crypto. Sound is interesting. Or the sell. The market trees. We could put out later. We got it already. We got the tools we need already. We just need to put them together. Let's just change their name to Chad crypto. That's happened. Let's see. What could it be commenting when they administer your comments like coin desk? Maybe you have to get your own blog. You have to get your own video blog. You have to make copies of your comments. I don't know. They definitely have to censor your comments. Especially if you use the effort. When they coin desk in Bitcoin magazine, but coin desk in Bitcoin magazine, these outlets are always their own worst enemies. The first time they start doing silly stupid things, half a dozen competitors showed up. I love coin telegraph. I think folks should give them their readership. Oh, prices muted as your microphone working. Something is happening. We said read coin telegraph. We've got a comment from Theo who sends us an unverified is on a blog. It is not fair. For the first time on the show, we are ULB. We use the internet. We have hammers. We have nails. We like USD. Hale, USB. Hey, ULB. Our favorite channel is the BBC. They teach us how to use our tools in order to fight. Oh, so hopefully the BBC will report on this. Next week. What he wants to know how to use web torrent. I'm not sure if it's been finished and developed, but I hope this development will finish. I hope that we'll be able to watch videos within the browser using the torrents. That would be magical. Our last question is from Julian Yatt. How do you feel about large whale groups like the coin markets cartel who control the price of Bitcoin and the entire altcoin market moving down with their win with tens of thousands of Bitcoin at their disposal. I don't like it. I don't know what it is, but I don't like it. We go whale on this show. What? Thomas? Do you like cartels? I've got cartels. There is no such thing as the coin markets cartel. That's ridiculous. I don't give beetles. I just believe in me. Moving on. I agree with price. Our story of the week. Everyone should have a picture of our story of the week and maybe you might have written a whole article while we've been here. Blake Anderson's story of the week. My story of the week is that everyone's talking and nobody's doing once again. Everyone's talking and nobody's listening. Everybody's promoting and nobody's creating anything. And it's a shit spiral. And I think that it's going to get really bad until people finally wake the fuck up and actually make something. So I've had a really good week. Developers, get back to work. Stop talking on talk shows. Bryce, we're... Man, I've just been going on all day about how I need to do less development because I got more stuff going on. But then again, there's like three or four guys that work for us doing developing. So I guess I could have passed. It just travels downhill. Chris Ellis. No, that's not fair actually. Bryce, like, I've been at the Bitcoin squat now. I've been covering them for a few weeks, about three weeks, although I spent most of this week off. And yeah, they do code. Like, yeah, there's a lot of docing around, but there's also a lot of concentrated effort. And this was Pablo who I met today. Yeah, that... I was an aiming head at them. That wasn't a pointed comment at any individual people. And just for the record, I think that they're working outside of the spokes. Go above the white paper. So it's a good project, but I'm that is involved with it as it would be if I thought that they were working within the screen. Well, they're working on it. It's actually very clever once I kind of understood it. And I'm sorry that I didn't take more time to understand it before that interview with the BBC Click beforehand. But I thought it was highly theoretical until I started looking into it. And then I realized, oh, actually, this is all this is as a shared secret in a split private key. Like, it's actually very, very simple the way it works. And the reason I like it is because it uses cryptographic primitives. They don't they don't need a fork in the blockchain. It works as is. And it's just very... I love elegant, simple technology. And this is Pablo, who is the project manager and the lead... Well, he described himself as the lead developer. And often I think we think of a mirror as the lead developer, but actually, although he does all the important stuff with the Bitcoin backend, with a little bit with a little bit coin, it's actually I believe Pablo, who kind of whips everyone into shape and gets everyone in line. So I had a long meandering chat with him and it was very enjoyable. And I really respect him a lot. And I hope that I get to speak to him some more. And also, I was just on I was just on tour just there. And I was looking up who funds ISIS. Can I get my tour browser? Can I get my tour browser up? Quickly enough. Anyway, it turns out that it's got nothing to do with Bitcoin and everything to do with these angel investors in Qatar. No, I can't get it off in time. So we should ban angel investing and we should ban startups because clearly these angel investors from the region of Qatar are funding ISIS. And actually, why are we even calling them ISIS? Why don't we just call them a bunch of fucking beheading criminals? Why don't we just call them a bunch of murderers? Why are we even using the words like why are we using their terminology? They've said that they want to be referred to as ISIS, ISIS, Islam, they've got a huge branding error, by the way. Like it's worse than fucking Starbucks changing the logo every a couple of years. Like what the fuck? Like I do not agree more. In fact, like, okay, ISIS, right? And Islamic State, here's the big thing that everybody is avoiding, right? The word is called caliphate. Okay, but that's a big scary word because the last time there was a caliphate, they kicked white people's ass, stole the true cross of the crucifixion and buried it under al-Axamasq and Palestine. So the caliphate is a bad word. We can't say that. We'll just say Islamic State and pretend it doesn't exist. Tag this video is entertainment afterwards because I've been noticing we've been tagging these as news and politics. So I think we should definitely like entertainment broadcast would be the best way to tag this video. I'm not going to touch any of that. Christoph Atlas. Yeah, so just two things that I want to touch on briefly. This notion that like ISIS and other terrorist groups are going to use Bitcoin, if fundamentally, it doesn't really make a lot of sense because you can't fund these terrorists or based efforts for very long unless you have fiat currencies. Fundamentally, they're not very, they're not profitable at all unless you have a public that acts as the bag holders through inflation. If you take inflation out of the out of the situation, as is the case with Bitcoin, then it just, it doesn't work for very long at all. It think maybe they would be able to do a couple, a last attack, so whatever. And then they would just run out of money. It's just, it's not a money-making scheme. It's going to lose to actual capitalistic efforts that enrich people's lives and generate wealth through the process. The other thing that I want to touch on is PayPal. So I think that I'm certainly experiencing, I'm sure that other people are experiencing this kind of weariness about the price, disappointed to see that it's 400 or whatever. I'd like for it to keep going up instead. Every time some news comes along, I see people that get their weary about this, their concern, the price is going to drop down to the next resistance level at whatever, 240 or whatever it is, 260. And they're like, I'll paypal. Well, this will bump the price up. And in each time I have to kind of like manage people's expectations and say, well, it might be, it might be a little bit of a bump, but I wouldn't get too excited about it. We just don't know when the next leg up is going to be in the price. It's not noble. And I think that's panned out so far with this PayPal thing. We got a little bit tiny bump in the price from like 400 to 430. And then it went back down to 400. And nothing really came of it. So all the people that are saying that they know what's going to be the next stage of the Bitcoin economy as far as the price goes, they just don't think they actually know. And if you do hold a lot of big coins, if you make your your big your larger income and big coins as I do, like be very conservative, sell a lot of that off into dollars right away. Make sure that you can pay your bills. Don't do not plan around the idea that the price is going to be X in Y months from now because you don't know. Terrifying. But I'll do my prediction. Bitcoin will succeed. Not only do the Bitcoin price bound, but the Bitcoin spirit bound as well. Bitcoin has gained a powerful new ally this week with PayPal. Sure, we'll never forget the time they froze donations to WikiLeaks or all the other nasty shit pulled. But for now, let Bitcoin partner with PayPal in the same way that Apple pay is partnering with the credit cards. And in the same way that Apple partnered with the music industry, oh, so many years ago, in days before they gave out you two albums for free. And made you download them automatically. PayPal is Bitcoin's new friend until people realize that you can do Bitcoin without PayPal. Oh, we're out of time. Until next time. Bye. Bye.