The Bitcoin Group, the American Original. For over the last 10 seconds, the sharpest Satoshi's, the best Bitcoin's, the hardest cryptocurrency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists, Gabriel D.Vine from Future Rant. God bless America Internet. Toned Vays from Brave New Coin. Hi everyone. It's like 90 degrees in New York. I can't believe it. Theo Goodman from Hasse online. Welcome everyone. I'm happy to be on the blockchain group. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network. Welcome to our viewers on Bitcoin.com and the World Crypto Network. Moving on to issue one. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark because Bitcoin could grow to use more power than the entire Danish state. Has Bitcoin been unsustainable this whole time? One researcher concludes that by 2020 Bitcoin could require more than 14 gigawatts of electricity just to run. Gabriel D.Vine does Bitcoin require too much power? Is Bitcoin doomed? Yes and yes. Bitcoin has really had an interesting run in 2013. But since then, it's doubling power usage and the power. Actually, one of the things about this article, there's a lot of good information about this article. One of the things that we get wrong, the amount of electricity isn't actually running the hashing algorithms. I think they're just sort of fighting it. The miners are fighting against each other in order to get the block reward. They're not actually calculating, I guess it's hashing algorithms, but it's not like calculating transactions. So it's really just a waste. In the miners, they don't need to actually use that hashing power in order to calculate the transactions. But they need to fight each other in order to get paid. So really, the solution is proof of stake. And the coordinate boopta of the theorem that will blockchain scaling will be solved within two years. So it will be unnecessary right now. At first, the unit necessary to evil. But obviously, this is as the article right and points out, Bitcoin is just a footnote. And it's going to be just a footnote of financial history. So hopefully it doesn't also, you know, based a lot of valuable electrical energy to before it completely collapses. It does seem like we could also duplicate most of Bitcoin's functions on the Ethereum blockchain. Tongues. Yeah, no, the article definitely pointed out some interesting things. I mean, I'm going to share my screen real quick here. There we go. Is that working? Did I see my screen? I really like how it starts off right here with we know for a long time that Bitcoin is unsustainable. All right, so let me get serious here for a second. This is completely crazy. And they're compared it to gold, but also talking about all this power that is going to be needed for Bitcoin. And in old seriousness, it's, you have no idea how it's going to work. Nobody does. I think it's great that all this power is actually being used for Bitcoin because you have no idea of what kind of innovation is going to come with this power. And it's all about security. And this article was extremely frustrating. Now they didn't mention Ethereum, but they're clearly had a big Ethereum logo. I'm not exactly sure why they had that in the article. But in all seriousness, right? So I don't understand why people are complaining about the power consumption being used for Bitcoin. Because you need it, this is why proof of stake can't work and you really need proof of work in order for it to work. The power consumption is just necessary. And I like how they arbitrarily picked a country like Denmark. Because it doesn't matter. You're always using power. There are all these assumptions. I remember when I was in college, some computer science major tried to explain to me why there will never ever be wireless internet. This is also a little preview of how long ago I was in college. It wasn't even that long ago. It was like the year 2000. Some computer science major tried to explain to me why there will never be wireless internet because there's too much data. It's just crazy. I remember listening to a presentation by some cryptography expert saying how the Bitcoin mining structure will completely collapse in six months. And I heard this presentation back in 2013, I believe. I mean, this is just crazy. And I can't believe these articles get so much play. So on death note, I'll give it back to you guys. Theo, good man. I think that this is a very interesting article and brings up some very important points that I think that we can solve a lot of these problems using Ethereum technology, including the Dow incentive system. So really proof of work should be renamed into proof of waste because all of the wasted energy could be used for a different process. So there is a myth that's being propagated throughout Bitcoin fields that there's going to be more efficient mining hardware that will be produced. But you have to look behind the scenes. Who are promoting these ideas? Most of the time the people promoting these ideas are behind the Bitcoin Ponzi itself. What needs to happen is people need to realize that proof of waste is going to create a problem and I really like the picture they used on the article of the nuclear power plant because we're going to have to use nuclear power in order to power the proof of waste. And how are we going to deal with the waste, the nuclear waste? Well, that's quite simple. We'll use a smart contract in order to distribute the incentives of who gets to hold the nuclear waste and for whatever amount of time. It's similar to the game Hot Potato. You hold it for a little bit and then you pass the nuclear waste along. So I think that Ethereum and the Dow system can really help us here. I'm surprised that Satoshi didn't initially plan it so that Bitcoin could only be mined with nuclear power. That seems like an obvious function that we should look into adding into the Bitcoin system as soon as we can. Exit question. New technology will be developed that reduces the amount of power needed to run Bitcoin. Yes or no, Gabriel, D Vaughan. I mean, yes or no. I mean, technology can move forward. You know, and whether it can be applied to Bitcoin is kind of relevant if it's just to just collapse it's because it's on this game. Tones. Yeah, no, I mean, absolutely. I mean, we'll probably have like satellites in space collecting solar energy directly to run the Bitcoin network. That's where I see things going eventually. Theo Goodman. Absolutely not. Proof of waste is doomed. POS. Proof of safety is the way to go. Definitely we will see satellites going around the world wasting all kinds of energy in order to promote the Ponzi scheme that Bitcoin is. The answer is yes. New technology will be developed. That's why they call it new technology. Issue 2. Bank of Canada researcher concludes that a Bitcoin monetary standard would fail. While Bitcoin standard would provide the benefits of stable currency due to the predictable creation of new money and the limited supply, the new Bitcoin based economy would cause central banks to lose control. Tones, Bitcoin based economy. Good or bad? Man, then we just do this like on the last show talking about another central bank talking about creating their own cryptocurrency or what happens with Bitcoin. So, this story from Canada, the reason why I founded frustrating is, again, they're using the same argument for why Bitcoin is good and why Bitcoin is bad. Right? Not article. It's a big coin standard would have two major benefits. One of those benefits would be, it's a greater price level predictability due to the known deterministic rate at which new Bitcoins are created. So, that's a benefit. Then right after it says, well, Bitcoin is a problem because you can't control the rate of how many Bitcoins you print. This is ridiculous. I can't leave people write these things. And I mean, they nailed it on the head when they say, well, no government entity would want this because then they have no control of the money supply and of the interest rates. You don't even know where to go with this. So basically, like I've said for a long time, if there is a monetary system running on Bitcoin, it will have a problem because you need a way to create credit. So you need fractional reserve lending. It is absolutely necessary. This is why the gold standard will fail and has failed all the time. You need fractional reserve lending. You have to be able to lend money to businesses that need to expand and create jobs. And this money can be hypothecated or created out of finair. That is okay. This is how economy scale. This is how economies grow. What is not okay is infinite government borrowing because they never intend to pay anything back ever because governments don't make money. They only collect it from productive people. So the reason why these bankers will never understand what needs to be done is because they need these monetary policies that they currently have. But you've got to get government completely out of it and not allow government to borrow any money. And then you need rules for responsible lending. So Bitcoin does put a limit on what government can do. But one of Bitcoin's current problems is it doesn't have a mechanism to create a credit system. And hopefully in the near future people will trust Bitcoin to be the backbone of a credit system. But again, you have to make sure to keep government hands off the money. So we'll see how it goes. But for now, these central banks will just keep spinning their head because they don't understand these concepts at all. So they're trying to fit Bitcoin into what they know and it doesn't work. Perhaps in addition to the separation of church and state, we also need the separation of money in state, the government. You do? Well, I have to say that central banks are needed in order to control the money supply. And upgrading to new technology is only a normal procedure. I mean, when new technology such as databases or computers were introduced, the central banks are also upgraded. As will they with cryptocurrency? As you notice, you can also upgrade on the Microsoft Azure cloud. This will enable businesses and central banks to upgrade to cryptocurrency standards. Now there's another thing. Any monetary system with a hard cap is doomed. It's over. Any economics 101 standard will tell you that you're lost. I mean, what are we doing? Are we going back to the barter economy or what? So what I think is that a Bitcoin economy just can't work. Fractional reserve lending can only happen via Ethereum technology and using smart contracts and DAO's with pre-sales to fund the incentives in order to get the money from the productive participants of the economy into the system. This can only be overseen by the federal government. Just like they say, you can't have roads without traffic cops. Gabriel, D. Vaughan. I agree with Theo about the necessity of a central authority to manage an economy. I also agree with Tone that fractional reserve is absolutely necessary for any innovation whatsoever to happen in an economy, especially because it's an essential piece of the business cycle. It's like causing large increase in available credit to an economy to the point where investors are struggling to find projects in which to invest. In other words, there's always going to be capital for your idea, no matter how ridiculous or totally unprofitable it's going to be, as long as you have credit for that, for that to happen in that sense, then your economy is going to be in good shape. The important thing to realize about business cycle, which is a natural result of fractional reserve, is that those booms and busts draw off the wealth in important ways to the center of the economy, which is the most vital backbone for success for any society. I've heard the center of the economy is made of peanut butter and has a soft candy shell. Exit question, will we ever reach what the author is describing a state where Bitcoin is 100%, or will we always have a mixture of Bitcoin cash and other currencies? Tone Vays. Oh, man, that's actually a hard question. I know I would like to see Bitcoin as the backbone of the global financial system. I don't see it. I think there will always be a mixture. That's probably where I'm leading to. It would be interesting. I haven't really thought about this enough. It's so far down the line, but maybe I should. Theo, goodness. I think that we're going to have a future of a mixture between Bitcoin and Ethereum, Dow tokens that will fuel the new economy and innovation within startups and the third world development that will bring up the world into new levels of enjoyment. Gabriel, do you bond? No, I don't believe that Bitcoin will form the new backbone of the new economy. I believe that it will be permissioned ledger tokens that will be issued by governments. We're going to see a complete collapse into historical obscurity. The Bitcoin units will have just a collector's item value, if some fraction of a cent per unit. We're going to see government currencies coming onto the blockchain where they're issued transparently and lost in the process to the private blockchain. Bitcoin's are going to be collectors item and you've got to collect them all. Moving on, people are really slowly today. We've got something new for you this week. At Perse, Perse merchants buy and sell anything with the lowest fees. It's the easiest way to sell things for Bitcoin and to buy things with Bitcoin that you could then sell. Try it today at Perse.io. 2.3, digx.dowl raises $5.5 million in single-day crowd sale. Digx, a company that plans to build a platform for trading gold-backed tokens on the Ethereum blockchain, is based in Singapore and claims that they will hold the gold themselves, cutting out the middlemen. Let's see. Theo Goodman is digx the new e-gold or is it just like the old one? Digx is better than the old e-gold. This is the next level deal, people. If you are not in on the crowd sale, then you missed out. You are old. You're a Bitcoin maximalist. You are just a non-believer and you don't even know what the hell is going on. Come on. You connect Ethereum with gold. Bam, you got to explosion there. You got to buy in now, early and heavy. I mean, come on. E-gold. Did E-gold have smart contracts? No. Did E-gold have distributed autonomous organizations? No. Did E-gold have cryptographic currency? No. Did E-gold have proof of work, proof of stake and all that shit? Hell no. Get on that digx shit. Find out, Gabriel D. Vyn. I think digx is really onto something here. I mean, one of the big problems with Bitcoin, of course, is many critics pointed out is that my luck is repeating on me. What is Ethereum there? What is the big problems with Bitcoin, as we all know, is that it's not backed by anything. I just pointed out by Peter, what's his face? The gold seller guy, whatever his name is. It's not backed by anything. We had a strong currency when it was backed by gold. They had Nixon drop the gold backing and now we currency lost a lot of value. Bitcoin is going to lose a lot of value because it's not backed by a sound money. It's just an idea. It's just numbers in thousands of computers all over the world. It's not anything tangible. If you can back these meaningless digital ledger entries with something tangible like gold, then you've got, as Theo said, a really winning combination. I also agree that lunch ought to really buy in, harvest, and I've invested several billion dollars. It's a fun listed which they're not allowed to talk about, but actually when they finally list their capital value, it's going to be most of them on these fine action. It was mine. Now I own that. I'm going to have my friend go over there and check out. Make sure they've got their gold losers on the fly out there. Then I'll trust them. Remember that the only thing more valuable than gold is a gold back token on the Ethereum network. Tone Vays. All right. Well, as fun as this is, I'm actually going to share my screen again because I hope you guys can see this. As fun as this is, I'm actually going to take this seriously because I can't believe how many buzzwords are just in this first paragraph alone. Initial coin offering. Decentralized autonomous organizations. Gold. Ethereum. I mean, who doesn't love Ethereum? This is like the perfect article. It's really sometimes hard to tell what articles are April fools and what aren't. Oh, man. Am I still sharing a screen? Oh, I'm sorry, guys. It's just what I've been doing on my free time there. I mean, you really got to be a believer in this. So seriously, and how do you turn off screen? There we go. Am I still on screen, Cher? Here we go. No, no. In all seriousness, this might be probably the stupidest thing I've ever seen. And it's competing with a lot of things, like not just in general, but especially today. And the problem with E-gold was that it was centralized. And this thing is centralized from three different angles. It's completely hilarious. But you have to trust that they're actually holding the gold because their claiming that this organization is an organization and at the same time is not an organization because it's decentralized. Then they're somehow having these contracts on Ethereum, which again, I don't even know what they're doing. Who is buying into this crowd sale? This is just hilarious. And a problem with E-gold is because the government came shut it down and took the gold. What do people think is going to happen with this? Assuming that people didn't already run away with all their bitcoins that they actually paid to get this thing or Ether or whatever it is. I mean, if they paid an Ether, I'm sure those people are probably keeping it an Ether. But if they're running, they're ordered converted to Bitcoin, which is what I would have done. And it's hard to say where to begin. The only reason you would have something like this is because you literally want to use it for senseless transactions. But instead of just using Bitcoin, you're using a gold back token on the Ethereum, needing the Ethereum token. I mean, the only thing they're really missing there is notarizing it through FACTUM and I gamble it on it through ORGAR and then they hit everything. I'll just leave out a doubt. It's hard to keep picking out it. It's just hilarious. It really, really is. It's amazing combination of different fail points. If Ethereum fails, if Ethereum goes offline, you can't move your gold around. If the gold vault where they're keeping this is seized by the government, then your tokens are no longer connected to your gold. And then of course, the classic idea with gold tokens is if only we could print more tokens and have less gold. Classic. Right. And don't forget trust in this counterparty that is holding the gold and on top of that, who may not? It's all secured with a Dow. Of course. A smart contract. It's secured. Cryptographically secured. Counter-party over. Cryptographically secured. Now smart contract and a discussion. And on top of that, what if the gold back token has its own free market value that differs from the pegging to the actual gold? Markets are efficient arbitrage rules that solved end of discussion. I believe you are beaten with buzzwords there, Tom. We don't have an exit question on this. So any final point on a gold back token, Gabriel D. Vaughn, let's just start there. Buyers, what do you mean? Buyers, you can't. Don't waste. No, I'm still on all reading math. It was just, it was unbelievable. Theo, good. Good. Unbelievably indeed. It's incentivizing counter parties through smart contracts and decentral autonomous organizations is the future. If you don't get it too bad. I thought you were going more. It's so unbelievable. No one will get that. But moving on issue four, Bitcoin undervalued by $200, investment bank and asset management for a need-humming company. Released a report this week claiming that Bitcoin is undervalued by more than 58% with a fledgling cryptocurrency having both a digital gold value and acting as a payments channel. Gabriel D. Vaughn, your thoughts on this shocking report? Well, a couple things, you know, I think it's a very sound math here by this guy, Spencer Bogart, the author of the report. He derived that market capitalization value by declaring that 75% of Bitcoin's market cap is treated as an investment. And since that's 6% of the value of gold ETFs on the market and that those will, the bank investment, bank, you know, the need-hum predicted that go up by 25% in the next four years. So if that's 6%, then Bitcoin's being held as an investment, going to go up to 655. Totally sound. You know, it's a great four math there. And the other thing I'd like about this report is that they recommend buying the Bitcoin investment trust shares, GVTC, on the OTC index. This comes back to backing, right? Why buy Bitcoin when you can buy this vehicle for speculators to invest in Bitcoin without actually having to buy it or hold it? Then it's backed by Bitcoin. That's backing is there then on buying assets. Yeah. Tom Vays. It was, I mean, I actually took a look at the entire report. It was like 40 pages with a few interesting things there. It seems that the guy understands what Bitcoin is, but they are scared of actually saying what is being used for where its actual value is. So and the value of $200, they're it's undervalued by, I mean, that's just a random thing. They just pulled out of their hat. It makes no sense at all. But also doesn't make sense to compare it to gold. They're very different instruments. They are not the same thing. They are completely different. They have some similarities, just a few, but you can't compare the price of one to another because they serve very different functions these days. In addition, I mean, they really did shy away from saying what Bitcoin can really be used for. And that kind of bothers me because it's a bit hypocritical. Also I don't understand why they don't recommend of holding the Bitcoin itself. They're sending you to the Bitcoin trust, which has fees and also a tax structure, which Bitcoin doesn't. And also there's jurisdictional issues with the Bitcoin savings and trust. I mean, what if someone from India reached this report? I mean, they don't really have access to the Bitcoin savings and trust. It also comes with a minimum of $25,000. I mean, it feels artificial to me that they're just pushing people into this instrument. And personally, I'm not a big fan of that because it might centralize one entity of holding a lot of bitcoins that they are responsible for. And what if they're not as good with security as they think they are? And that could cause a monster issues throughout the entire ecosystem. So we all agree with Bitcoin. Tom, I agree with you about India. It's just something I didn't mention in my comments. And if you're in another country and you can't access the Bitcoin investment trust, I say just go on the dark and find somebody to buy Bitcoin and hold it for you. That's my advice. Yes. Yes. So those are my real comments. They all know Bitcoin is undervalued in the long term. But in the short term, it's all speculation. So you can really go either way. I personally wouldn't let anybody touch my bitcoins. But that's, again, but that's because I think I know how to secure them and I understand a lot of people don't. Yeah, good. Shit. Don't touch my bitcoins. Yeah. You can compare. It's true. You can't really compare Bitcoin to what this article is talking about. Actually, I think what it is is this article has a major typo. Instead of saying Bitcoin is $200 undervalued, they should have said, no, not they should have said. What they were thinking is Ethereum is $200 undervalued because there really is no comparison. Okay. Let's do a five second comparison. Proof of waste, proof of safety. Bam. That's it, baby. $200 undervalued. That was very great, though, but I still feel like I'm Bitcoin Maximus or whatever they're calling us now. Exit question, force prediction, the price of Bitcoin this time next week, Gabriel D. Von. $10.50, just under either. Tone going to refuse to predict the price. Now, I'm going to go the other way. I'm going to say we're making you highs next week. That's it. It's a massive option is coming. It's going to happen this weekend. I already foresee it. I had some insight tips from the miners in China. Bitcoin will hit a price of $1243 by this time next week. Yeah. Good. Bitcoin is severely undervalued by $200. Bitcoin to add side chains with anonymous ring signatures for anonymous transactions and Litecoin adding Ethereum smart contracts in the OP return. Get it now, be it. The current time is 406 and that's what I'm going with. 406. Moving on to predictions or story of the week. Gabriel D. Von, are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? Yeah, I have a story this week. I'm closely following the US presidential election and decided that what American needs is me. I am running for president on the Republican ticket and I genuinely believe that I can beat Donald Trump and Cretus. I think that America, I can make America bleed again like a goat and I think that by securing this nomination, I can seize the power and spit it out to everybody. Better than Bernie Sanders, while holding just enough to protect everybody's needs, wants and concerns better than Donald. What's in here? Whatever's in here. And so, about 20, 2016. What year is this? I think it's Donald Trump versus Chillery Hinton. That's our Chillery Hinton. Tongue Vays. All right. As fun as April Fool's Day is, I'm going to actually go with the real story that just came out and it's a story in Reuters that Reddit has removed the clause from their terms of service and people referring to this clause as a canary in the coal mine for data collection. So, what a lot of these, some of the newer tech companies did was they put in their terms of service and their privacy agreements. Paragraphs that say, as long as you see a paragraph like this, you can be assured that we have not replied to any subpoenas, any data requests from the FBI, from the CIA and the CIA or any other agency. And these paragraphs are there. And that's what you do with the coal mine is to what color weren't canary. Well, no, no, it didn't. This canary died of natural causes back in the fall. And Reddit has just removed this paragraph. So now people are wondering, did Reddit have to comply with some kind of subpoena for information? Now, when it comes to Reddit, it shouldn't really matter because Reddit doesn't really KYC. But this is a general trend that is happening. So you want to keep an eye out on some of these companies that had these warnings in there. They are now slowly removing them because they have to comply with information for more losses of your privacy. And we'll see where this is headed. Hopefully Ethereum can rebuild the internet as the recent commercials are all telling us what will happen. Tom brings up a good point that Reddit doesn't have KYC, but you need to be careful with your Reddit account. If you link it to another service, link it to your Twitter account, link it to your Facebook. You've now linked your Reddit account to your Facebook account. And that could be the end of your privacy. So you need to be very careful when linking accounts. Theo Goodman. Yes, be careful when linking accounts. Story and prediction of the week is that the Ethereum blockchain and the technology will rescue the votes in the Florida general election from miscounting. As you have seen in the Ukraine where Ethereum was used in order to legitimately vote in a democratic election, this technology is on the next level of enabling liberty, democracy, world-wide at a low cost, not using proof of waste, but instead using proof of safety. If you do not understand, you better learn. Very good Theo. As everyone knows, the only way to vote securely is on the Ethereum blockchain. That's the only way. And now a story of the week. This weekend join us at the Bay Hackathon at UC Berkeley, sponsored by PERS to support the blockchain education network. Have fun, eat pizza, drink soda, hackathon stuff, slumber party, lots of pillows, pillow fight. I don't know, I've never been to one. But I'm going this weekend at UC Berkeley. Hope to see you there. But we're out of time. We're going to the screen share. And until next time. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye.