The Bitcoin Group, the American original. For over the last 10 seconds, the sharpest Satoshi's, the best Bitcoin, the hardest crypto currency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists, tone waves from Brave New Coin. Hi everyone, coming to you live from Saigon Vietnam. It's 5 in the morning and I have to cut my night party in short because I was not going to miss this episode for the world. Gabriel D. Vind from Future Rent. Hi everyone, it's 3.15 pm here in sunny Hazy Hollywood. I had to cut my Friday daytime party in short to join you guys. Theo Goodman from Pass Online. Hey everyone, I had to cut my party in short from watching the European Cup soccer here in Frankfurt, Germany. Get down. Split split split split split split. Ian D. Martino from Coin Journal. Everyone just coming from Washington DCs about 6 o'clock here. And live on the phone we have Professor Eman Gounsira from Cornell University. Hi everyone, I'm gonna start having a little more. All right, moving on to issue, oh and I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network. Moving on to issue one. Issue one, Dow, Hacked. The Dow, a leaderless autonomous organization was hacked yesterday with more than $15 million in Ethereum stolen. Dow token price dropped around 30% while Ethereum fell more than 16%. Plans are now being made to perhaps hard fork Ethereum to stop the attacker from being able to spend the Perloind coins. Meanwhile, the Dow is in disrepair having funded exactly zero projects before losing one third of its value. Professor Eman Gounsira, your thoughts on the Dow, Hacked. So it's like everything's a watch and some of you are listening like now. I was one of the people who called for a monetary moment now. So I asked her at one time saying that there were a bunch of attacks that were possible. And the worst flight layer since my nightmare scenario that got worried about it still passed. Somebody walked in apparently and got it and ended up using a particular interface over Dow and then he dealt about $2 million in Ether, which is a substantial sum. So here we are today and we have to find a way. It's a hard junction on the one hand. On the other hand, let's have most side of the bigger picture. The bigger picture here in my opinion is the Dow was only more than the initial success. It got a lot of excitement around it. It taught everybody the notion of what the good, good, right, could do. And I think a lot of potential, as people have seen that potential, it's just that the particular situation of it has to be really just a match for security poverty. One means from such an essential vehicle. And this particular one wasn't good enough. So I hope that we can sort of in some order of expression on why what happened and then what I saw in post-war, for a pumping bigger picture thing and for better small country. Very good. Theo Goodman. Well, I think that it definitely has contributed to the feedback loop of pump and dumps. And we've seen now here is a dump. So a lot of panic was going on this morning in European time with Ethereum and Dow. There was a big dump and there was even on exchanges. They stopped trading, stopped deposits of Dow and Ethereum and so on. I think that there's a lot of things to you could say about this. But I think that the whole smart contract thing is something that has not been totally explored as far as so-called attack vectors. You could also look at them as utility vectors depending on what side you're on. I mean, can't I make a smart contract to reward miners that opt in to not going along with the hard or soft fork. And I'll even reward them in Bitcoin. I'll just make a smart contract and say, hey miners, you join this smart contract. I'll code it in solidity or whatever code in language, Python, number two, Ethereum style or whatever I need to do. And then, you know, I just say, hey guys, you guys opt into this. And if you do and it go and the fork doesn't happen, then you get a big reward. And that reward is going to be bigger. Your risk reward is going to be bigger than if you go along with the so-called thought leaders that are basically shitting in their pants and are like, hey guys, guys, guys, guys, miners, miners, miners, you got to do the soft or the hard fork. You guys got to do it because I think that's what as a leader, I think that's the way. So basically, you know, you do have as far as I know, technically, we're still in the proof of work stage and the miners have to approve everything. So miners, you're the ones that are going to decide if there's going to be a hard, soft fork or whatever other kind of change that are being proposed. And I think it's going to be interesting to see what's chosen. Now, as far as history, let's just go back really quick to some history as far as I know. It's a little complicated because we haven't had a smart contract platform exactly like this. There has been, though, NXT. So there was a bunch of NXT hacked from bitter, I believe, and the community opted not to do a fork. So they were like, okay, it was hacked. And they said, okay, we're going to leave it. And there was also Mint Powell, Very Coin. A lot of people stole Very Coin from that proof of state coin. And they said, okay, we're going to do a fork and that was a fork done. So there's cases as far as blockchains are concerned where they went along with the hack or not. So let's see what happens. And I remember Theo in the Very Coin example, Very Coin being proof of stake, was worried that the hacker would become the number one stakeholder and get most of the rewards, essentially making it their coin. Gabriel D. Vaughn. First of all, I'd like to say it's really special having Professor Sirir on the show today. I think it's quite awesome. I've been following his work for a while and I just really love all the work he's been doing. I believe it's over at Cornell, is that right? Yes. So yeah, thank you very much for coming on the show. I enjoyed your column about the Dow hack, specifically that really kind of made it easily digestible for us lay people to understand what was behind this hack, which I'd like to point out that calling it a hack is, of course, expedient, but as you very adroitly pointed out in the article, Professor Sirir, there is no spec for the Dow. Sloket did not write a white paper. There is no detailed spec sheet. And so in this case, the code is the contract. So if you did something and the code allowed it to call that a theft is a bit of a jump in logic. I mean, you could also call it an interesting and unexpected corner case that was allowed by the smart contract code system. And it's really unknown because you can't move the money out of a child Dow, which is where the attacker placed the ether or the Dow tokens rather. So we don't really know whether it was just something to alert people to this fact or whether it was a legitimate attempt to try to steal funds. I mean, everybody's going to blacklist this account, this Dow account now. So it would be very difficult to actually move the ether. But of course, if there's no hard fork, that money that the people put in, everyone basically lost approximately 23% of their investment that they put into the Dow. So it's, yeah, I mean, in blacklisting is a very, very slippery slope. So it's an extremely challenging conundrum for the Ethereum community. It's a classic conundrum as many have pointed out already on Twitter. Don't fork and make your system look like it allows very insecure, you know, Dow's and smart contracts to be listed above it, or hard fork and undermine the faith in your blockchain. These type of situations are a real test for communities. And I think that next was a, you know, that was a really smart decision, long term for them, not to hard fork. I don't think that Ethereum has the balls to leave the theft as is and just have everybody go off to their own devices. But if they do, kudos to them. I think that's the right choice morally in this situation is not hard for. But I just like to point out something that tone has talked about a lot, but it really highlights Ethereum's advantage over Bitcoin. So, recently was the strength and organization and consensus of its developer community. Well, now the centralization of that developer community is coming back to haunt the Ethereum community. And we see the exact weakness of having figureheads, heroes, and centralized figures behind which a community rallies, only to see that they've got too much power. And now when a conundrum strikes, there is a tiebreaker and we see that smart contracts of this type, possibly are not smart at all. And they're just like any other legal contract where they're open to interpretation by human beings. I've even heard some say on Twitter if they do decide to hard fork, they should change the coin's name to Vitalik Poon. Ian and D Martina. Well, just one quick correction. You do actually have a white paper on their website. I don't know how long they've had it up there, but it's up there now. The white paper is a loose guideline. It's not a strict spec sheet though. Right, I haven't really read that. I just, when I was on their site today, I noticed they had one. So, I just, because they said they didn't, but I don't think it really, it doesn't really matter. I think this is definitely a disaster for Ethereum in general and for smart contracts, beginning to Gabriel's point about the centralization and leadership. There seems to be a little bit of arrogance from the leadership, I believe. A lot of these problems were pointed out in the past couple of days. I looked at the GitHub and it says they fixed it. The problem that was, I don't know if it was, because I didn't read the professor's piece, but the issue that was initially pointed to as the issue that allowed this. You look at the fix for it that was committed six days ago and they just moved the line down from 747 to 749. The security blog that exposed that problem showed, said that that was one way to fix it, but to not use it because it still allowed the exploit to be fixed. That's my first issue, but with the, what they're going to do going forward, whether or not they should hard fork, I think that's, it'd be easy for me to say that they shouldn't hard fork, but it's not my $60 million that's locked up in someone else's account. You can see where they're coming from. In the very coin case, though, it wasn't just that one hacker who would be getting most of the rewards, he would have most of the weight on the blockchain, so, I believe he would've been able to double-spend those coins, and not only just get the state rewards. Same thing with the next, the next day was much lower, so it's also proof of stake, but they didn't have to worry about that. Two different situations. I think this is pretty unique because this is, I mean, Ethereum was really up-swing and I think this really just put a bunch of cold water on that. So I think Ethereum can survive, obviously, Dow is not going to survive and I'll see where it goes from here. I'd like to point out that the price has been frozen for many hours. So the price that Tom has quoted there in the beginning is certainly not where the market we pricey these things. I'm sure we'll see a large drop in both Dow tokens and Ethereum. Oh, definitely, definitely. We'd just like to say a quick hello to everyone watching in the World Crypto Network chat room. If you have any questions, please put them in now. We'll be doing questions and answers on issue four. And now, tone Vaze. All right. Before I start, someone just say, the Ether price has been locked. Is that not traded right now? I believe the exchanges have all frozen trading. No, no, no, no. Okay. It's trading. It's trading. Dow and Ethereum are both trading. It was frozen. I think Dow might have been frozen. I mean, as far as trading, I don't think it was frozen, but I'm sorry, I don't have the exact information, but I think Polin X. So Vitalik did call for a stop to trading. I think they stopped on Polin X for maybe 10 minutes. Then that's loom trading as far as I know the two tokens are trading on the right. And yeah, and there was some delay. There was some pause on deposits of both Ethereum and Dow, but that was about eight hours ago or more. And so I think everything is going right now. I stay correct. Oh, okay. So here we go. I'm not even sure where to start. So I start with I told you so because I said this was going to happen exactly like this and it happened exactly like this. I also want to say I couldn't disagree with the professor more. I don't understand why in the world anyone ever believed that Dow was a good idea. It was designed as a scam like I said a month ago and it's exactly how it's playing out. It is completely unnecessary because even if you have smart contracts and I'm okay with smart contracts, you have a self executing contract. Beautiful. There is absolutely no reason for it to be decentralized at the moment. And more importantly, there's no reason for it to just write itself on top of itself with its own token. The whole tokenization is complete nonsense. So Ethereum is now well, the Dow is obviously completely screwed. Ethereum is probably screwed but as long as Vitalik is the God of Ethereum, people will believe in the God of Ethereum. So oh man, it's like having over the start. So they don't have any good options. Obviously, first Vitalik tried a whole trading, again, completely ridiculous. This is what free markets are. So their options now are to try and freeze the hackers funds or to try and like hard fork which means that it is not an immutable ledger if they can just go ahead and just put the coins back. I think one of the wallets did this like three years ago and it was just a death sentence without wallet when it got hacked. But let's get to the regulatory side of things. This is the reason why we have regulation. I am a big anarchist. I speak in anarchist conferences. And here is the thing. I'm a believer regulation. What I am not a believer in is AMLKYC. I am anti-AMLKYC but I have a big believer in regulation. Just not regulating the people, regulating the institutions and regulating the projects themselves. So go back to regulation for a second. Who did this hacker steal this from? Get in and steal it from anyone. I don't want because they took, they voluntarily gave up their either. They gave up their private keys and they put this thing in a smart contract. So you have not even what a call of a hacker. I want to call a smart contract writer who clearly was smarter than the programmers who wrote the doubt. Who exactly did this either get stolen from? Because if you read the coin desk article that explained the doubt, the creators of the doubt explained why the doubt was legal by not calling it a VC fund, by not calling it an organization, by not calling it an entity that is holding other people's money. So if you're not an entity, then you can't claim that something was stolen from you. They wanted to be nothing. And now the Ethereum was locked up, it's been taken. And you have no recourse. This is absolutely no different than a Mound God situation where everyone is blaming Parpella. Now here's the other problem, since you can't prove a negative, the creators of the doubt will never be able to prove if this was them that did this to take the Ethereum. And now they're pretending to give it back. Now this is probably not the case, but guess what? Good luck proving it in court. Just like Mark Parpella will never prove whether he orchestrated the hack of Mound Godx and took the coins himself and it's hiding it versus a hacker got in and took them. Again, this is why we have regulation, but I am still anti-KYC-Avalon, it's nobody's business. Nobody needs to know whose adoption like a photo is, again, huge advantage where you don't have a central party. So I always expected the co-founders, the co-creators of the doubt to get arrested and get in legal trouble because they just created tokens out of finair. The doubt also created a token out of finair and to take your Ethereum. I mean, even if this did not get hacked, they were of lost to Ethereum anyway because it would have gone to like super projects that were never going to work. Because anyway, just watch episode 95 of the Bitcoin group. I'm not even sure what else to say here. Maybe I'll come up with something else. You guys had some really, really good points. I don't know who you took the money from. I mean, you have no recourse now. This is what happens when you create the doubt. The whole thing was so stupid from the start. I've always said Ethereum was almost virtually a scam from the start. The only difference between Ethereum and Paycoin was that Ethereum went above the floor of $0.20. A momentum kind of took over and Paycoin did not go above the floor of $20. You flip the expectations and Ethereum is Paycoin and Paycoin could be the darling of the cryptocurrency all the world right now. There is exactly the same. There are no use cases for the doubt and they're proud for Ethereum and they probably never will be. It's in direct competition with Bitcoin as long as it stays proof of work. The reason is because I don't care if they use different algorithms for mining. They use the same electricity and they use the same mining investment. The only reason there's even mining on Ethereum is because all of Bitcoin hardware that was selecting dust now became useful. Once that hardware goes obsolete, now an investor has to decide. Did it want to invest in Bitcoin mining hardware or Ethereum mining hardware? Ethereum staying proof of work is the direct competition with Bitcoin. Only one of them will win. We only have one internet. If they decide to go proof of stake which I don't think they will, then this could have easily been avoided. Guess what? The one with the most stake just reversed the freaking transactions. This is why next I think it's also kind of a joke. I don't understand why some smart people are trying to program for it. Go program on Bitcoin. Go program on the longest chain. As far as group of stake goes, there is zero innovation of proof of stake. We've had proof of stake for thousands of years. It's called a king. The person with the most money on your island or in your country was the king of your country with the most money with the most at stake to run that country. That's what proof of stake is to me. There is zero innovation there. It's all going to boil down to proof of work. I'm already going on too long. I'll let you guys fill anything else. Just go watch episode 95 and then watch me double down on it episode 96 a week ago. This was just so obvious. Yes, I was drawn out of Ethereum. I didn't expect it to go above a dollar, but it's still going to zero. Ian, did you want to follow up on that? I did a lot of reporting on Paycoin. Compare the two is, that's outrageous, Tony. Paycoin was designed to be a scam from the very beginning. It had no programmers. It just copied code from other people. It didn't actually work. Any of the things that they promised didn't come true. One thing you can say about Ethereum, I mean, maybe you think it's a scam, but you can't say it's a scam on the level of Paycoin where it was had no tools or utility. I do think that there is hope for decentralized organization in the future, but maybe we don't put $150 million in the next one. Maybe we just limited it to, hey, let's experiment with a million dollars. Let's not take everyone's investment, put all this money in one centralized spot for someone to come steal it. Ethereum equals Paycoin, man. That's a leap too far for me. I got to say that. Professor, while you have your hair, Tony said he didn't believe that there was a reason for decentralized autonomous organizations. I was wondering if you wanted to just expand on your beliefs of where you think this technology could go or just general idea. Sure. I talked to him. That was a lot of things like the one in the comments, some of them as well, but it was very amazing. Let me try a couple of words very quickly. So at a very high level, I think it's a really, really big wide world out there. We've barely stretched the surface, so the speed of that experience somehow comes to this point. There's one I do not subscribe to. And when we think about these things, we don't typically think about the miners. Liner's are trailers. They will come in like the money. And they will come and make their own investment decision. What they really have to think about is, honestly, the markets, the people who want to go in into these coins because of the unique uses they're offering. And there is coin. I mean, there is a good mass deal with this. This coin has some luch. It's extremely good at selling that luch. And if I compare it to a lot of the Ethereum, the game is like this, it's a bit drastically different. And finally, this is a virtual machine. It's enabling a new set of applications that I last thought of at this point. So, the two are not in competition at all. And if you're thinking about the investors who are putting their money in economics like this one, the people who are there to hold on this coin, they're not going to put their money in the inflationary, they think it's easier. So even at that level, I don't see any competition. So I'm about to take a broader view and think of it as both of the key things that have two fantastic technological products with unique features. So that's my starting point one and let's go to the response to the very first of things that you mentioned. So, let's see. There are a couple of other issues that we're going to have to share with you. Are they useful at all? In general, the concept of the whole of Dow is a fantastic idea. We have a lot of operations where we are beholden to a company for its own operation. But we don't know what the company is supposed to do. On what it's really going behind the scenes, we have to say, I'm not doing this discussion. I'm like a minister in the way we used to build secure computer systems. So, one time when the Department of Defense installed the machine, how does it know that the machine is really what it's supposed to do? If the problem is exactly the same, how do I know that my bank is doing exactly what it was to do? I don't really know. What I can do is I put the players upon layers upon layers of organisms, and you know how do you know that the auditor is correct? On the same time when I'm getting my own bank was correct, there are those the auditor's crypto left. So then, now you have to audit the auditor and you know, it's settled over right now and you get the 2008 crash. I just exactly what that was when the whole system was corrupted about the wish-mash of and time of people have all together their own self. So, computer security is in a secure, well used to be in a similar situation. The blockchain technology is too much of a way out. I can say, I know exactly what that code was in there and it's doing. There are a couple of technological things I can do this way. One of them is called secure hardware and you like to find the Intel SGX or on TPM's trusted platform module for doing this. But you might not have. But the other one, which I'm sure everyone has heard of, it's called the blockchain. So, on Ethereum, I can be assured that the contract or the program will run the way I think it's going to run. And that's an amazing thing to be assured of. So, if I want to not trust the process, then I can then contact the process on Ethereum blockchain. I want it running to be dispersed according to a certain distribution. Let's say I'm entering into a contract with a rent company. One of the most corrupt industries out there, they will take care of money and then we'll see if I need to find a trickle. Well, if your record company payments to you could be codified with the help of a smart contract, that's the first one you would be insured as sounds bouncing to. Another thing you can do is ensure it's industry. That's another industry rights, the conflicts of interest with circular dependent income support. And I want to do so, I have a very clear contract that I am assured that if there's a flood, I'm sure it will pay up. And as the moment I have no such thing, I'm just going to open a prayer. And if there's a hundred years flood, somehow those things have been more and more secret than you think. That hundred years flood could wipe out my reassuring company. And then I'm going to like so, to go to commerce and expand for the handout. But as I'm sure, once you get into a small contact with it, I'm kind of going to be centralized, but I'm not going to start with some information for this. I would be insured that there are funds backing the claim. So these are just two examples of the top of my head and I think I would think of a little harder like to come up with more. But I don't want to take advantage of this side. There are circles useful use cases, actual, society could use cases for a contract. Now, all that said, either also stands undoubtedly. We know that some of the first contract we've experienced was through the funds and people want funds, because you know, there's a chance that it's going to be in the money. But without more gambling operations, and now, you know, they're fine. I'm going to take a look at some people wanting to look at it and not very surprised to be successful. Now, I think they're most like first-hand, and I think they're okay. But now, itself, this crowdfunding thing, that was interesting. It's how the government should be fairly able to build a business that it was really promising. It could really have been the debt generation funding vehicle, so I'm very sorry, you know, one of the kickstarter like funding opportunity. We're going to turn that kind of upon me, where it starts funding itself, and investing in risky derivatives, and I don't know how it was going to go. It was an interesting experiment, and I still go like to find out. I think there would be a doubt that one goes. And finally, the time I wrap up very quickly. When we mention it, I don't think that this is the end of the theory at all. I think this is the theory we're going to come out from the two-way course, and I'm telling you so. You make much stronger as a result. You're getting a lot of trust, you're getting even more recognition, and everyone's going, what's with that? How does this stuff work? What can I do with it? Just like we are now. The matter of an exciting thing, this is so cool, guys, come on. Again, anybody should be able to see that there's suddenly the opportunity to build things that we did not know how to build before. It's still going to manage money. This is fascinating. I'm sick and tired of writing programs that think stuff on the screen. How boring is that? And when you've got money, you can start to build actual, on the fact that you'll change in the world. It's just the first thing for me to build out there, and it's great to be at the forefront of it. Very good. Very good. I'm going to reply real, real quick. Again, I have to disagree with pretty much everything the professor just said, and all of the examples of for the Dow and for smart contracts that were provided, none of them require a decentralized solution. Yes, you can write a smart contract to automatically pay out during a hundred-year flood, but there is absolutely no reason for that to be decentralized. It will be much more efficient in a centralized system, and you can pay a fee to a third party to hold this smart contract and execute it during the event of a hundred-year flood. I don't see any efficiency being brought to any of those examples. Yes, we do need smart contracts. Yes, it will be nice for automatic execution, but there is no reason for it to be decentralized, nor touring complete. That's my biggest problem with it. I don't think Ethereum is bringing all that much new to the table. I don't think it brings an efficiency. It brings an enormous amount of ish technological issues that could be exploited by having it decentralized, and by having it touring complete. Again, I'm more for smart contracts, but I haven't seen a single example that needed to be decentralized. There is Bitcoin, was the innovation, because all our payments, all our value transfer digitally is censored. It's all being controlled by governments, so decentralizing a payment is very, very important. What percentage? If we say 95% of all payments are being censored, or being controlled, basically any payment outside of hand-to-hand cash, when it comes to contracts, any contracts all over the world, what percentage of those contracts are being censored by governments? The question in the answer is very, very little, unless you're in a specific jurisdiction where your government doesn't allow certain contracts. To me, the only reason to decentralize a smart contract is to prevent censorship. Those examples are tuned far between, especially in the first world, which is why maybe in the future, when we have a complete tyrannical government, like in 1984, a book will have a need for contracts to be decentralized, but right now, I don't think we do, so I'll end on that. If I can get in real quick, I don't think it's about decentralized contracts. It's about decentralized organization, which is a totally different thing, and could have potential. You could have a charity that was decentralized, and people voted on how every dollar was spent. I'd be much more apt to donate to that than to the credit. Why do you need a decentralized organization? Why can't you vote in a centralized organization? Why can't I vote for my taxes go? There is nothing stopping the government from allowing me to allocate my taxes, like I allocate my 401k plan. There absolutely is something stopping the government from doing that, and it's called regulatory capture. It's called fraud, and it's called factions, which they would be kind of lobbyists. That's logically. What is stopping the government or any charity from allowing you to just vote with your money? What is stopping people that had a theorem to donate a theorem directly to the projects that they like, instead of putting them in the Dow and letting the curators choose where their money goes, and now their money has been locked up by a hacker. What was stopping all of these Ethereum people from holding on to their Ethereum and just donating it to projects that they like? I'll tell you one. It's laziness, just like representative democracy. Not everybody has the time to research all that, and so they'd like to give their money to somebody essential to make that decision. That comes with a counterparty risk, and now we're seeing that all play out. Like you said, they're free to give their money in, and that's why you don't consider it a theft, because they were free. They didn't do their due diligence, which hardly anybody in the entire world can, but the fact that they didn't recognize that they needed to do that research, and that if they were taking a huge risk by placing their money in this software system, and to say that it's actually a theft is not quite right. It's kind of skating over the truth, which I agree about. I'd like to say that I agree with Professor Syrer about the potential for decentralized autonomous organizations in the future to be amazing society-changing things. I don't think we're there yet. We still need to build up a lot more tools, and that's something that's alluded to. And I think that you have too much faith in governments. They have shown themselves to be untrustworthy, and they have shown themselves to be setting up authoritarian, police state style things, even in the West, even in the United States and Europe, and Australia. These things are happening, and we're heading in that direction. I agree 100% with that. Hey guys, I just want to say that this kind of comes down to a few critical points. One critical point is oracles, and another critical point is just humans. I mean, like the example from 2008 about the crash or whatever, people knew there were people that knew that was going to happen. There were people that knew that things were totally fucked, but either one, they didn't care, or two, they said something, but nobody cared at the timing, so at the time when they gave that information, they didn't care. So if any Dow or decentralized thing is relying on any information that is inputting into the Dow from a human, a centralized place, then they're going to have that risk in it. Yeah, that's right. That's really important. That's an important decision. That's a thing now. We're not seeing that exactly now, but we're seeing that in the sense of you have the so-called leaders of Ethereum or Dow or Dow Curiators or whatever you want to call them, saying, hey, guys, these are some, I think this is the best way. Software, hard fork, or whatever. Hey, if those ways have merit or not, it's another discussion. But the fact is you have these outside, non-decentralized human elements saying, this is the way, and the miners have to decide if that's okay or not, if that's a risk reward that they're willing to take. I'd like to point out that you're always the type of smart contract. That's not the only type there. There's internalized smart contracts. Of course. Yeah, but how are you going to, definitely, definitely, but I can game that too. I mean, we're all humans here, right? So I don't know. I just, okay, you make a smart contract to say you're going to be honest while make you a smart contract to make you dishonest, and I'll just pay you a little more. If you're opening yourself up to counterparty risk with oracles, then you're going to have a problem with security. If you have an internalized smart contract that only depends on things inside the system, such as Bitcoins, Multiseg, or Bitcoins, check sequence verify, or holding funds to X block number, it's much harder to gain that when it's an internalized smart contract. Sure. Those are the things that are going to be really robust when you're in my phone. Sure. Sure. Sure. I'm willing to experiment with that, but we're seeing live right now how things can be gameed. All right. And the professor would like to respond to tone. Go ahead, professor. So let me just quickly mention, yes indeed, if you are able to trust someone, find somebody that you trust, and pay to actually have some reason to trust them. Yeah, you're OK. So you're absolutely right. You could easily convert any decentralized thing, and replace it with a centralized thing. Absolutely true. But if you look at how much people have to pay for that service, it's awesome, very high. If you look at the amount of percentages overhead, then the hedge funds trim, for example, and you compare that to how much the Dow was trimming, you will find that the Dow is an emergency. It was trimming the 0% of the winning go back to the industry. There is no middleman in the middle to take a cut. So some efficiency perspective or some other economic perspective, there is a huge audience being made. The second issue, so if you kind of dismissed that, then you went on to say, well, it's only in the case of avoiding governments and avoiding governments and avoiding regulations, I think that was a false choice. I believe that the efficiency gave you gains a pretty strong. I agree though that any slice contract has opened the Oracle issues. But this is not really looking for many companies. Companies are also Bloomberg, because some of them have a bad message and crash market today. Bloomberg actors are especially an Oracle, and therefore they have to be double-ginsed at the point. And we're going to ask the finance, how to don't just work in the Oracle, but I agree with you, that that's a matter of standing problem that has left no fault yet. But it is something nevertheless that we can identify and even sort of circumscribe as a technical problem. We have some way to make a progress against this, and it is possible to make it either inculubbable technically, because the data is coming from elsewhere on the internet or it's coming from the blockchain itself. Or if it's corruptible, that is there is only going to be human elements involved. You know what? We even have measures for dealing with that. So there is such a thing as the legal system that you can't pull back on. But you won't have to move it that often, because most other aspects of the operational system will be coincisive in the contract. But when you're doing it, you can actually pull back on it too. And that's not the case that we have to choose to choose the children or children or either. So I think finding that right mix and evolving towards the healthier ecosystem is going to come to an end. But we're getting there and you're seeing the sort of associated elements of babies begin to lock, they're kind of wobbly on their feet. And that's the situation of the thing. Very good. Excellent discussion. Thanks everyone. And we're going to move on to the exit question. exit question. Yes or no. Is it right to hard fork the coins and foil the hacker? Looks like Theo is gone. So Gabriel, Devon. I already answered this before. I think it's wrong. And I think they should not hard fork. Ian, D Martino. Well, like I said, you know, it's easy for me to say, say they shouldn't. And from the outside, I would say that they shouldn't. But I think it's going to bring up a bigger moral issue, which is kind of an issue in democracies. He itself is, can the majority have the right to oppress the minority? The minority in this case being the hacker or a trickster, whatever you want to call them. And the majority being everyone wants their coins back. So in cryptocurrencies, should the majority have the right to oppress the minority? I think we're about to find that out. Tony Bees. I think it's 110% wrong. I don't believe that they have the right to hard fork. And, you know, reverse transactions. So no. Theo, good. It's a slippery slope. Once you do the hard fork now, think about how many other ways I can gain. If I'm someone that wants to do bad, and I see this now, think about how many other ways I'm going to look at this and figure out weird bugs in your code or other ways I can gain this now. So once you do it now, you're on a slippery slope. And so I think that you've got away the Whisk reward in the long term if it's worth it. Miners. Professor, your thoughts. I don't want to see a fork. It's that I don't believe I could get the hacker's anything wrong. I use the word hacker just to refer to hacker in this. I could call some of the words not some of the reactions to any of the people's eigendictions. But, you know, my heart tells me that there's a lot of high-age out there coming from the people who lost a lot of money. And I think that the path of each film might actually involve resorting by person with transactions. So I think I might simply have to watch a film and not even watch even objects in the past. It's a tricky conversation when you just bet you might have told them to. All right. Thank you. I agree with this very small argument. Does this channel possibly become a little too? Because I'm the entire value of both of the things you guys quite call to a longer one. So there's actually an exception on one point only in the beginning kind of a thing. And one of the extreme versions we could have just one. All right. Very good. Thank you very much, Professor, for joining us. Everyone can follow the professor on Twitter at EL33TH4XOR. Don't be tax-er! I'm trying to drive. LLE Paxor on Twitter. I'm an author. Thanks for joining us. Thanks so much. We'll talk to you soon. Thank you very much for having me. Thank you very much. All right. Moving on to issue two. Let's look back in. Issue two, Bitcoin booming. Bitcoin price passed $700 this week, rising more than 30%. Well, being up more than 200% on the year, rumors say massive buying from China and the hype of the happening continue to cause Bitcoin's monumental rise. Gabriel D. Vine, your thoughts? Have we seen the top yet? I don't believe so. We're heading for the happening. We've got about three weeks still. And my prediction several months ago was $840 for the happening because I was thinking, you know, the market's skinnive sort of balance out because Bitcoin has this game theory. Systemic design that has checks and balances. I generally think that the marketplace is an interesting role in valuing Bitcoin. And my prediction was that we would approximately double in price from a few months ago, which is about $400 for $425. So that makes $850 because if the block reward is going down by half, then the market's going to make up the value there. That's kind of a species though. I mean, I don't have any hard facts. It's just my kind of off-the-cuff prediction. So we're heading directly for it. At this rate, we'll definitely pass $850 or $840. So who knows? I think we're definitely going to in a very, very bullish phase until the happening. And then the having is going to happen and nothing will happen because it's just that miners doing business behind the scenes. And they sell a lot of their coins in dark pools anyway. So I think nothing is going to happen and then everyone's euphoria will go away and there will be a bit of a dip. And then we're going to see the real effects of the happening happening over many months as this, as the supply dries up and people really want to get more coins and can't. And then we're going to see possibly the next Bitcoin bubble. Ian, D Martino. Well, I definitely don't prime myself on making price predictions. But I will say that Litecoin, which is the last like major crypto to have its own happening event, it had a big price spike about a month before it's happening. And then most of that was gone by the time the happening happened. The difference is here is we have mainstream media coverage, whereas Litecoin, I mean, they got some crypto media coverage. But we have actual mainstream media coverage in Bitcoin, plus interest in China. I don't know what that's like for Litecoin, but I assume it's lower than Bitcoin. But it is something to keep in mind that happening does not always equal lasting returns. But that said, I'm still very bullish. I think we'll be at a thousand by the end of the year. But I mean, who knows, could go to the opposite way. A good warning, but still bullish tone days. Yeah, I'm bullish on the price going into the happening. I'm going to give the same exact answer I've been giving for probably seven months now. I started giving this answer at the San Diego conference. Kyle Torfie was there at the road article about our panel with Brock Gears. And my answer then is the same as my answer now. And miners would ramp up here and try to get every last 25 Bitcoin block they can, because they know that the rewards are going to go down and they don't know if their operations are going to be cost effective after the happening. I also expected miners to ration their coins as a small business owner myself. The most important thing to me is consistency. I want to know what my projected revenue is and what my expenses are. If you know for a fact your revenue is going to be cut in half. But your expenses are not going to be cut in half. You need to ration those coins and then sell them. So I've been expecting going into the happening less coins being sold by miners than let's say last year. And after the happening they will sell more than 12.5 points per block. Again, that's just my personal speculation as a business owner. That's what I would be doing. So that's why they ramp up all that power. So I am expecting. I'm not expecting big rises in in hash rate after the happening because the miners will kind of keep it steady. They already used up that bullet or that gun I guess before the happening to get the last big blocks. And they will see whether their operations are affordable. I expect some smaller miners that they don't have that down price. Yes. I expect smaller miners to shut down and last bit going price goes up and up and up. Which I don't think it will. So I am expecting a dip after the happening and then we'll start to go back up again. I'm still expecting a most of the expecteding authority like another exponential rise over the next few weeks. And here is why also I've been hanging out with Roger there the last few days here at the conference. And him and I are getting phone calls and texts from people who have we have been telling for a long time by Bitcoin by Bitcoin. And now when I get tested by people say, hey, how do I go by Bitcoin? Where do I buy it? When this is happening at new old time highs, it's not a good sign. So that's also another reason. There's a lot of new people coming in and sooner or later it will dip. I do think we will touch it. We could easily touch a file is over the next few weeks. I would not be surprised one bit. But it won't last. We will come back down. I think we will. Wherever this bubble, this particular bubble for this year pops will probably come back down to at least the current levels. But I don't think the days of 200 or 300 will be seen again. Deal. Good. Okay, I don't know exactly what the question is if it's a price prediction question. But let's take a look at this rally and compare it to 2013, 2014. So there's a few things that are interesting. I guess the main thing is China, China, China. Everybody is talking about China. Well, first thing to keep in mind is that I'm a white vault headed dude and I can trade on the Chinese exchanges. So just because you see people trading on the Chinese exchanges doesn't mean necessarily that it's Chinese people trading on that exchange. And I don't believe their volumes either. That's another problem. That's what I'm going to do. Tony, I totally agree. So we can't say for sure where what's going on with the volume. But what we do know is what we have in front of our face. And that is that okay coin dot CN doesn't have trade fees. So when you trade, you don't have to pay fees. You have to pay fees on other things like if you want to trade on margin or if you want to use services to buy Bitcoin from China and so on, then you have to pay fees. But you don't have to pay fees in other ways. So that has the potential to create other volume. So if there's other exchanges making fake volume themselves, well there's no real way to prove that. But it's possible. And even if it's not possible, you know, it's if you don't have a high amount of trade fees, then you know, you could have a lot of volume there. So that's something that's different. You don't have gocks with the willy bot or whatever, but you know, you have these other exchanges and you have a lot of trading on margin. That means people trading Bitcoin with borrowed funds. Now some people might think, okay, that's dangerous. Well, that's interesting. A lot of people are along on margin. Okay, but if people are along on margin, we have the price as it is right now. Then what does that mean when your average job is? So we have the price as it is now. And then that's the Bitcoin traders trading on margin. And then when your average job is at circle or coin base, then where's the price then? So there's different ways to look at it. I mean, so we will say people buying on margin. That means it's weak. That means they're going to close because they have to pay fees. There's the other way to look at it saying, okay, these are the traders buying on margin. What happens when the cash buys happen? So there's different ways to look at this rally. Exit question, force prediction. What is the price of Bitcoin for the happening on July 10th? Gabriel D. Von. I'm going to say 1075. Ian D. Martino. I'll say 900. I'll go above that and fall back down to 900. Tone pays. Oh man, my answer was going to be right around Gabe. I'm going to go 1076. We're going to play the price is right game here. Da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da. Oh, goodness. We're going up, I think. I'm not going to say exact price. 3000. 3000 House. issue three oh wait oh we have the plug hold on a sec already for this Bitcoin price up suddenly feeling very rich why not add to that richness with savings shop at purse.io and save 15% off Amazon so if you're Bitcoin went up 30% and now you're gonna save 15% well that's a that's a whole lot of savings now you're catching on spend Bitcoin save money at purse.io issue three the Canadian Central Bank denied plans to launch a Canadian cryptocurrency aka Canada coin a digitalized version of the Canadian dollar that would allow Canadians to buy sell and hold the world's first government backed cryptocurrency the bank says Canada coin was only a test project a proof of concept undertook with the R3 banking consortium but it obviously does raise the question should Canada create their own cryptocurrency in DeMartino. Sorry I didn't know it was going first on this one um yeah it should they I mean like should the government just that that's too broad of a question I mean will they do it probably never the the Bank of England had a finance just for the governor of the Bank of England whenever they call them over there across upon stated you know he he was talking about their distributor ledger project and he's talking about potential currency and one thing that he brought up that I never had thought of before because we see it as an advantage but banks would potentially see it as a disadvantage was the removal of friction if there is a ever a bank run investors be able to get their money out too quickly which you know and go through the bank whereas usually stock market crash you want to move your stocks back into cash it might take like two three days for that to happen without that friction all the stock market stock workers we moving out the stock market within an hour using Canadian coin and so that that's something that would turn them off and seems pretty counter to anything that we do with Bitcoin not even like just philosophically just how cryptocurrency's work it removes friction so I don't know how we would ever solve that problem you can never put everything back into the box Pandora learn that one tone phase so I'm actually going to take the opposite position of what Ian just said again right using the word crypto for these government currencies I'm not sure what that means right because a cryptography okay fine it's secure but that doesn't mean anything right we have digital currencies which is like the median dollar just like the US if more so the US dollar at far the first world developed world goals and the US dollar is probably the least digital currency there is because US dollar way to make cash in digital cash for trans cash Canadian dollar isn't as useful outside of Canada so I would say there is a higher percentage of digital Canadian transactions than there are physical cash transactions now it does Canada want to go fully digital so eliminate paper cash of course they do there's three reasons for this and I've mentioned this on my presentations one of them is they can set any monetary policy that they like and people have no recourse you can't withdraw from the banking system if there's no cash the other reason is psychological like in an event of like recent cypress if there is no cash there's no long lines at eight m's because there are no eight m's so psychologically you don't have these pictures of cues or cash you can distribute it and the third reason is it's all about taxes because every single human is a tax evader in the eyes of the government that's why they can't fix all of our problems but all the money goes digital than according to them no one will be able to obey taxes now the reason why I'm gonna go the answer of Ian is because if everything is digital and there is no this three-day life it will not be the withdrawal from the system at the flu of one I come in the out one line of code and they don't have this line at the flu of button they should ease everything like the three-day settlement is actually going to be relevant in the grand scheme of things I've mentioned before I said that C zero project wasn't really a mild thing too much and the reason that the three-day settlement is kind of irrelevant the only people that the three-day settlement affects is people would less than 25 thousand dollars because if you have less than 25 thousand dollars on the American markets then you can't day trade basically you can't like enter a trade and exit like three hours later you need more than 25 thousand in your account and that's due to a three-day settlement rule so it's only a more than 25 thousand dollars in a trading account the three-day settlement doesn't affect you at all in fact you know you can't satisfy any people's digital in their end so if they go to those digital they will just hold the entire system at the foot of the key so you exit the digital actually impossible not not faster it would be possible now is there a real thing that's going to go to a system where the person has full control of their money like in the case of Bitcoin with real private keys I don't think that's going to happen so I'm not even sure why that's in the discussion I'll hold another bonus of eliminating cash as you don't have those pesky pictures of people carrying around wheel barrels full of cash after inflation that's the same as the ATM picture yeah I didn't really take a stance on whether or not they should should make a cryptocurrency so you can't really take the opposite's dances me I was talking specifically about what you said that people would exit faster during a crash that was my view is they wouldn't be able to exit at all right right and I agree in like if it was actually created that's probably what would actually happen they would have some sort of shut off switch I was just relaying what the the governor of the Bank of England was saying it was a concern about making their own cryptocurrency because they addressed the issue but they said that was one reason why they wouldn't because they were scared that it could cause the liquidity problems yeah if they allow people to hold on to their own private keys but that's the question right it doesn't matter whether they go whether they go crypto or not the question is who's holding the private key that that's the real that's the real question that needs to be asked not whether they're going to a digital currency they already have a digital currency so they make it cryptographic so what so that means they won't be really happy but they government doesn't get hacked they'll just you know print more so it's a the the question of all now is who's gonna hold the private key that's the beauty of owning the printing presses you can always print more do you good man well there's there's been some interesting points raised there's there's more than one point so before we get started with all kinds of crazy conspiracy and speculation hats off to whoever got the Canadian government in their marketing funnel and whoever consulted them to get a whole bunch of money damn you got the Canadian government to get on blockchain I hope you're rich now and I hope you can go chill and some like island or whatever but as far as the points that everyone else brought up besides that besides selling Canadian government that they need blockchain for some kind of thing I mean you know yeah it sounds cool and if I'm a government worker then I want to be on the cusp of what's cool and I don't want to miss out I want to I'm gonna FOMO because you know if I have the ability to FOMO and I'm gonna get you know disciplined for not FOMOing then I'm gonna FOMO and I'm gonna go in I'm gonna go on the blockchain token coin crypto thingy and I might not understand what all that means but I might do it or and there's another aspect okay so about the private keys okay that's cool I might I might let's say that Theo controls his private key and he's in Canada well let's say the Canadian government says Theo you can only buy things if you use that private key well they're just tracking me everywhere basically so every every time in Canada you're only allowed to sign and transact if you're gonna buy anything in Canada you can only use that private key to try to sign every single transaction then I have full control of what Theo is doing because it's on the Canadian blockchain and there we go then I have full control and we're calling Alex Jones and that's how it is so I mean there's just different ways to look at you know why they want to do it I think it's more of the of the first one that some marketing person and clever salesmen got them to buy into that but there could be an inkling of hey wait a minute I mean Canada as far as I know they've already done away with pennies so let's fuck that let's go the next step let's just go full blockchain and you know we're already you know kind of European socialist style let's just make it so you have to sign every transaction with your private key that we know exactly what you bought and if that's okay for you to buy and that end of that's it end it's an excellent point Theo we should be congratulating R3 for another impressive test project and I do think that Andreas Anson Alpheaux should be paid a 10% finder's seat for the impressive speech he gave to the Canadian Senate Gabriel Devon this is an interesting it's an interesting development I would say that nation states who are of course the ultimate entrusted third parties everyone you know unwillingly leases out their ability to enforce contracts and all manner of other rules in society to this un you know unlicensed entity I don't see the government having a license the you know just the the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence don't don't cut it for me these days but you know the government is an example of precisely the type of institution that cryptographic systems like Bitcoin and like you know distributed autonomous organizations that are being proposed that don't not not ones that exist so far but Bitcoin is sort of the first one they're meant to disintermediate these folks so governments have you know certain people in government very very very tiny minorities actually understand this process and of some of that fear as Theo pointed out not only fear of missing out but fear of being completely bypassed in the coming crypto anarchy is sort of trickling into some of the players and so they're they're kind of tiptoeing and and then thinking okay well if if a distributive if something with nobody running it and and you know pseudonymous people running it can do it surely a big government with a bunch guns can do it even better we're gonna do even better little do they know they are playing with dynamite and they're just lighting the matches oh it must be moist in here because it's Canada one of these days it's gonna blow up in their faces and you're gonna see one of these coins launch there's gonna be a Swiss coin or you know an or or an Aurora coin gets picked up by you know corrupt socialist centralized system so one of these coins is finally gonna launch and you're gonna see everybody sell it like a hard fork right into Bitcoin and it'll be really really interesting all of these projects are really bullish for Bitcoin because the more liquid they are the faster they are the more third parties they disintermediate as he pointed out the faster all that value can suddenly and shockingly shunt into a distributed currency and completely destroy the tax base and monetary control that any government has over its population so watch out come in good points gave and it goes well into the exit question exit question which country will create an officially backed cryptocurrency first E&D Martina well I guess if you had a put money on say canola's ahead of head of the race right now so that's that's all that about canola tone days I'm gonna go with Singapore Hong Kong deal good man listing Stein nobody's ever heard of it but that's a good good answer good answer I like that it's actually because it's not far away from Zoods with Sri Lent and it would probably get some kind of crypto thingy whatever token thing before the rest of Switzerland will Gabriel Devon I think Canada is a lumbering giant and Liechtenstein doesn't have enough developers to make it happen so I'm gonna say Estonia the correct answer is Switzerland they're sneaky they're hiding in mountains they'll surprise you and now on to issue four which we're gonna try a little question and answer we used to have a great system the Google gave us a question and answers but as you all know the Google Giveth and the Google take it so we don't have that anymore so Theo do we have any questions from the group and if you're watching now go ahead and write in some questions that would help us out a lot yeah I'm asking them now right now and I and I for warned them that I'm gonna ask later because I can't keep up with the chat thanks a lot for everybody but if you have questions now they're on about a 10-second delay or I don't know oh the idea I want to comment on Estonia real quick yes I like that in order for Estonia to do it the euro has to collapse because like Estonia was like a success story of how to run a country and then for whatever reason I don't know I mean I mean I want to even credit because it is such good things to get their country out of a hole like 10 years ago 15 years ago whatever it was and then they went and joined the euro which was I think that dumbest move they have 0% that now they're up to 6% yes it's better than Germany's 80% and 60% but so the euro is a bad idea they need the euro to collapse and then they'll be smart about things okay well I like Estonia everyone that's from Estonia and I've actually visited there it's a cool country to visit and they've got some cool islands in the Baltic Sea but besides that questions from our chat actually panel what do you think the impact of the Brexit or the potential Brexit of the exiting of Britain from the euro zone could have an impact on Bitcoin so let's go down the line Gabriel Devon I think of Brexit actually addressed this on the Bitcoin news show with vortex on Monday night the Brexit I believe would have only an indirect effect on Bitcoin at best through weakening the euro in D Martino I really should have asked Oliver Cardin about this co-founder coin journal I would say that any kind of anything there chaos in the world is usually good for Bitcoin so if a great one sleeve the EU even though they're on the pound they're not on the euro it's still be good for Bitcoin ultimately at least a price tone ways yeah if Britain is to leave the EU and my my advice to Britain is to leave the EU because that's a sink and ship so Britain might actually start becoming a financial power again assuming they get rid of their stupid laws against encryption but the euro will sink a little bit faster and sooner or later Europeans will realize that Bitcoin is the only means to move their money out of the country so I do think it's a nice positive for Bitcoin if Britain does leave you know good man I'm very busy with our users in the chat as far as I think that I don't see a direct impact on Bitcoin as far as the price and everything except that everybody's waiting so what I think that's what I think is that it's just another thing that creates uncertainty especially with this new attack so there was an attack on a member of the labor party and he was stabbed and this is kind of creating some even more uncertainty as far as the whole vote so I think that it just creates more of a delay as far as what's going to happen because people are uncertain about it so as soon as that is you know thought up as soon as that's finished we know what the vote is then things can move on in all markets all markets are waiting for that including Bitcoin now of course Bitcoin I think it's affected probably a little bit less than some other markets but I think people are also waiting to see what happens about it so that's the basic impact it has now going back to our chat ladies and gentlemen the is very unfortunate the representative in the United Kingdom was assassinated she was murdered it was a very unfortunate situation yeah that is that is really unfortunate you know I don't want anyone to get killed as far as they're according to their you know political beliefs or whatever that's ridiculous no matter what you think about Britain saying in the EU or not and you know I think that that's gonna basically make it you know whether you like it or not it's gonna make it so Britain stays because people are gonna look at that and say okay this crazy person that didn't want Britain to leave stab killed this person and now we have to vote that they stay and I think that's probably gonna be the outcome so that's my prediction I think that Britain will stay in the EU but if they do leave the EU I think it would cause the price of Bitcoin to go up I think any kind of uncertainty or instability in governments or in currencies causes the price of Bitcoin to go up but we got a couple other questions I've seen flying by someone asks why Andreas is not on the show anymore we'd love to have on Andreas on any time that he's available unfortunately he's traveling quite a lot lately and of course lately he's been about a year and a half he's been traveling quite a lot for a year and a half and unfortunately Fridays usually one of his travel days but we'd be glad to have him on any time is a great guest on the show people are also asking why Theo looks so thin these days we were told earlier Theo's been kickboxing even got kicked in the face today good job Theo keep on it okay we're showing your face to see if they can see the red mark we'll see if we can get some analysis on that later it's okay all right let's see what else are we got here any other really good questions we've done a lot of a lot of talking today I like a question that I read earlier I don't remember exactly who asked I think it might have been Dan something how much do you have to pay experts to analyze smart contracts that's an important cost if you're launching a smart contract system obviously slug it did not spend enough if they spent anything to get their system the Dow audited properly I think that's a particularly tough question because it's a future question because what is a smart contracts analyst while you're part of it is computer science you got to be a program you got to read code another part of it is more of a legal ethics a logic question of smart contracts but I'll let you guys talk about it I think I go get you a hard on I got a really easy answer okay if you guys want to analyze smart contracts then you just come to the Bitcoin group you hire us and analyze your smart contracts bam you got it yeah are putting together a big powerpoint presentation we're gonna we're gonna slam you and it's you know it's only gonna cost you 30 million yeah I'll comment on this real quick because I don't want to keep going that question early I want to professor mentioned that that it would be cheaper I don't think it would be cheaper just like the question right there just ask because if you do have a third party executing these contracts I mean they're responsible for it they could be liable if they don't execute it properly not to mention their business goes away and on top of that having these cows I mean look I don't like lawyers as much as the next guy but unless your Dow has some kind of a built-in arbitration system and they're not even thinking about that part it doesn't really work I mean you still need an arbitration I mean yes I I don't believe that everyone can sue you know when you spill your own coffee at yourself and it was hot I think the most low cases are ridiculous and also a lot of copyright law needs to go away before we can even get there like again I meant high copyright law I meant high I'm for trademarks I like trademarks but I meant high copyright I meant high intellectual property protection but I'm for copyright I know Ian will disagree with the IMF if I've had these debates in the past but again a lot of these things need to be addressed before you to be considered having these touring completes for contracts where I don't think we'll get to them in my lifetime so I personally think I mean if you want to throw your money away at these things go ahead I'm not going to remember what Shakespeare said to ensure tyranny the first thing to do is to kill all the lawyers a lot of people leave off the first door that quote actually there's a there's a because he said it's so long ago Thomas back then the only people that have lawyers were like the kings and the government so the correct statement to that is the first thing we do is kill all the prosecutors if he was to say that today that is what he would say not the lawyers but the prosecutors interesting Ian did you have a response to what tone said I mean I'm not sure what you what specific part you think I disagree with I mean I'm pretty anti-how copyright works today I've been downloading stuff kind of illegally from a computer since I was like eight but the the question about was about how much you can have to pay for smart contracts I think that is a pretty important question because like Gabe said you know you're potentially going to have to pay a computer programmer and a lawyer or maybe just computer programmer I think in order for it to work we're going to have to see some sort of marketplace where maybe there's like pre-fat contracts that have already been worked out but you know I can't potentially see a use case right now maybe there'll be one you know then I can't foresee right now I didn't foresee the Dow which obviously is big huge failure but like as a concept or whatever people were obviously interested and so yeah I think the only way it works is if there's some sort of marketplace where you have pre-fat smart contracts people can use their companies can use then have already been vetted otherwise it's just paying two people instead of one and remember there will be other Dow's but we're about out of time here so just like to go through is anyone have a story of the week or a prediction we're gonna start left to right so we'll go Theo Goodman yeah my story of the week is the Theo Dow you can invest right now just tweet at Theo G double underscore and we've got a really crazy Dow with all kinds of smart contracts now story of the week I mean we covered the stories of the week the Dow the Bitcoin price definitely a story of the week how can we overcome that so I think story of the week is European championship in soccer and the Copa America championship in soccer I hope all of you are taking a break from the Bitcoin crypto world and doing something else in life besides that Gabriel divine I actually didn't have one but then I just read on the comments that PlayStation is joining steam and accepting Bitcoin so that sounds like a good story the week to me very good welcome to Sony in D Martino I don't have a particular story but just like to say one last thing about the Dow while I'm here if you're making an analog to digital currencies you know the Dow might not be Bitcoin Dow might be Digi Cash so there could be huge innovations that we can't even imagine right now that make it more feasible you know it could be five ten years down the line could be completely different from what we're seeing right now like I said this could be their Digi Cash or they're eagled and not they're Bitcoin tone days I'll throw in a kind of prediction so it's not that much of a corruption most people know listen to me and see what my tweets I'm not on the big block board was to all block I I mean I don't see I never needed to see a reason for blocks to go up even even right now I would have liked to see a team market but as I recently learned because I never paid Bitcoin a business of the Bitcoin three years I've never paid so I never dealt with the situation but as I learned from Rajabh's talk to them that you have a wallet that costs them to be in-take transactions so if you have like let's say you're selling something for ten dollars and you're getting a lot of traction and your wallet has told you a few thousand dollars worth of Bitcoin and then you go to move with three thousand dollars worth of Bitcoin and one transaction you're not paying that 50 and 50 because it's a fee like ten thirty dollars or something like that so actually I had no idea because I never experienced that so that is a big fee and something like that could cause the core developers to at least bump the locks aside even if the stopgap let's take a look to make even before segway release like so I do see a bump in the box I in the early near future don't have to because transactions like that shouldn't come with fees at high but if you have a lot of inputs before you have your output based on large dual bytes transaction that requires a larger fee or do you get it in the next class or in the next few blocks that that is something I learned in the news and it not back to that part into my advocacy post for a box so that's starting to frame my mind a little bit obviously I just thought you have a recent before infamous block size but I first know what wouldn't be too bad in your very good and finally a story of the week totally unrelated to Bitcoin but I thought it was really poor form of the NBA to suspend Dreamock Green it may have affected the entire NBA finals suspending in game five led to a situation where Cleveland won game six and now we're going to game seven right here in Oakland over the bridge and hopefully the Warriors can pull it out and turn this around but it's starting to look like the NBA is very fixed it hasn't looked this fixed since around 2001-2002 when the refs were rigging games for the Lakers to win and the Sacramento Kings to lose you think you can replace them silver with a decentralized commissioner I think we could replace it with a contract right it would be just as it's a house so because of that game I have to wait up this morning at 8 o'clock in the morning you and you know and that means I have now been up with 24 hours that's also why you see a pillow behind me because the moment's all both big that's dedication to yeah can't can't Dow save us from all this madness of refs rigging NBA games I mean come on Dow people I thought silver what anyone ever think about that call the talent only but I can save the NBA but first we'll have to tell them that the NBA exists but we're about out of time today thanks to everyone for being on today it's been a great show we had over 101 live viewers so thanks to everyone for tuning live we're checking in the chat room I'm gonna keep a window open so I get to read the chat later usually I don't get to do that Google deletes the chat it's tragedy I assume they save it somewhere but they don't give it to us but we're out of time until next time bye bye