The Bitcoin Group, the American original. For over the last 10 seconds, the sharpest sitosis, the best bitcoins, the hardest cryptocurrency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists, Tone Vays from Liberty Life Trail. Still muted. Oh, a lot of one. Thank you for tuning in. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network, moving on to issue one. Issue one, Interpol, Crackdown. Bitcoin was on the agenda for a meeting of more than 400 financial investigators at the global conference on counter-fitting money laundering and digital currencies in Qatar. The attendees published a list of shared recommendations, including a crackdown on Bitcoin. The recommendations focused on the need for Bitcoin exchanges and wallet providers to follow know your customer regulations and a total ban on so-called Bitcoin mixing services that could be used to create anonymity. The international police are very aware of Bitcoin. How will Bitcoin face this challenge? Will Bitcoin shrink like a violet or roar like a lion? Tone Vays. Still muted. It's a good time to like and share this episode. Go ahead, Tone. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay. I'm not sure what's up with the mute today, but anyway, it's just two of us. I'm going to probably stay off mute. So I'm doing a screen share on this article. It's a good article. It goes right to the point. And this is going to be like an old Tone I told you so section. I've been talking about this since my existence in the Bitcoin space. This is why I have never used Bitcoin in a KYC style way because to this day, I believe that Bitcoin is illegal. It's illegal. I hope you want to argue with me. Guys, Bitcoin is illegal. Bitcoin is a problem. It's a problem for governments. They're not going to be open to it. This is only the beginning. So there are many things in here. There's one that worries me the most. It's me the most. Oh, I can't find the word now. Hold on. Shoot. All right. Anyway. The word wallets. The word wallets worries me the most because at this point, I only trust one wallet and that's airbits. And of course, the hardware wallets which are the treasures, but I mean, treasures are kind of inconvenient. That's why they're more cold storage type of solution. But as far as walking around with a wallet on your cell phone and don't put any coins on my computers, there's I mean, just I crypto lock. I don't know this little nonsense. But so airbits is my wallet and airbits is a US company which worries me. But at the same time, airbits is a US company. So they have to follow some rules and regulations over US company. So you get the good with the bad. Now airbits continues to be hands off the Bitcoin, but who knows, right? What if the regulators show up at the airbits office just like they did with the Chinese exchanges and said, you know, you can't do this, right? I mean, the air your Bitcoin is safe, but no more development for any updates. Anyway, sorry, sorry, I got distracted for a second. So wallets is bothering me. So here's the part that is hilarious. I'm going to. The Bitcoin mixing services. So apparently they want to ban the Bitcoin mixing services. And this is just like, I'm not sure. I want to use the word stupid, but it's like beyond stupid, right? So apparently they learned nothing from banning music downloads and piracy. And then they learned nothing from video. You can't do this. You cannot ban them. And I mean, like, I don't mean, I mean, like technically, it's impossible. So trying to ban mixing services is literally throwing tax money down the drain. And this frustrates me to no end. So this is a huge waste of tax revenue. They're encouraging other countries to do this. Now if I was in any kind of country, I would say, okay, at this meeting. And then I would tell all of my law enforcers, don't bother. We're not wasting government money. But government wants to waste money, right? Because it's jobs. So it's like this terrible, terrible cycle. There is absolutely nothing they can do about it. Now what they will do is they'll pop some people, right? Just like some people got popped for music downloads, but mostly music uploads, right? So they'll pop someone, right? Like every now, every few months, there'll be an article where, oh, this woman just got fine. It was like $5,000 a song for like, you know, 12 songs she was sharing online. So they'll pop some people. They'll catch some people using a mixing services. They'll pop those people for some insane fines. And that's really all they can do. There were also like other like really key words. I'm going to put this together so I can tweet it out. Was it this part? Here it is, here it is, here it is. I'm going to circle this as well. And this is important guys, even that unexpected well considered a crime. Don't realize like these little, these are very, very subtle sentences and you have to read between the lines. And a lot of people will read this article. They will see the headline and they will ignore the little subtleties here where they're openly saying that unexpected wealth is a crime. I mean, this is straight out of the Communist playbook. This is all the socialists that are out there crying about Hillary not winning and Matt a Trump for winning. This is what they're advocating. One with a Hillary support sticker or sign or shirt. This is what they're saying. They're saying that unexpected wealth is a crime. If you're a rich person, whether you earned it or you got lucky or you found it, you are a criminal because you didn't earn it fairly and by fairly you didn't earn it at the same rate as everybody else earned it. And these are very, very serious problems. I continue to advocate not to use your Bitcoin in ways where it's visible. I'm sorry guys, Bitcoin is not money and if it is money, it's money where the activity that you're using Bitcoin for is we'll get you into more legal trouble than Bitcoin itself. I don't want to see anyone getting in trouble for using Bitcoin for buying bed sheets on over stock.com. I think that would be very, very sad, but this is where we're headed. So if you're going to use Bitcoin, we'll surely think about is what you're using it for, worth the risk of the use of Bitcoin. And so really it's true when we said buying Alpaca socks with Bitcoin is a revolutionary act, much more revolutionary than we thought, right? I agree and it's revolutionary. I know some people want to be, you want to make a stand, right? You want to make a stand, but do you want to be the raw suburb of over stock.com? Right? Because you were like the biggest buyer in over stock.com and then they found out that you had all your Bitcoins is 2010 and you never paid any taxes on it. And now you're going to jail for 10 years for tax evasion, right? The shanker of our of bed sheets. Right. Well, you've got to always think about is the juice worth the squeeze. So I believe in Bitcoin. I believe in can do a lot of good, but I think we need an entire generation of people to recognize that money isn't the crime. Money, not Bitcoin. Money isn't the crime. Our problem isn't that Bitcoin is a crime. Our problem is, as you saw by my last highlight, money is a crime. It's money. And as long as people think that Bitcoin is money, Bitcoin is a crime, not because it's Bitcoin, but because it's money. There's a bigger fight that we're trying to fight. And Bitcoin will help us because if there was no Bitcoin, the elimination of cash would be a disaster. But thanks to Bitcoin, the elimination of cash will make some of us rich. And we need to continue this fight that money isn't the crime. And as long as all these socialists exist, money will continue to be a crime. So you have to be careful on how you use money, whether it's cash, whether it's any kind of money. Money isn't a crime. I think that looked good on a t-shirt. Now while I didn't see the article as dark as tone sawd, I saw it more of a slightly humorous gathering of 400 law enforcement officials and do buy somewhere. I saw more as a checklist for developers. Here's what to do to improve Bitcoin. Here's where the problem is. And the answer was mixing services. Apparently, we need more mixing services. Maybe we need ones used tore, ones that are more anonymous, focused. But that's what they've identified and that's what we need. The other point that I think tone brought up that needs to be brought up again is they went after wallet providers as well. Wallet providers, when you look at the Bitcoin ecosystem, they want to control all elements of it. The new bitcoins come from miners. That's hard to control. Those bitcoins could go to a wallet. They could go to an exchange. By attempting to control both of these, they're attempting to control anywhere that the bitcoins could go. So it really does have a lot of tax potential. And like tone said, we might get in a lot of trouble for spending it even $10 at a time. Although I don't know that they have enough to catch us all. It goes back to the MP3 debate where they could stop one of us, but they won't stop us all. Unless they try to do that this time. What do they tone anymore of this? No, no, that's it. I mean, I'm seeing some people angry at me in the chat. And that's fine. I take a very controversial stand on this one. And the other way to look at it, and I agree, the other way to look at it is to say, you know, screw the state, screw the mall, we all should use more and more Bitcoin. And that's fine. People have been saying it, the libertarians, the New Hampshire faction. They've been very serious about Bitcoin. And many of them probably do consider buying socks a political act with Bitcoin. And maybe willing to go to jail for this, but no one wants to. I mean, another part of this. Right. I don't want to. Is this the gondi case and all they're fighting us now? I mean, we're well engaged in it. Are we going to win? And some people can do it. Hey, you don't want to consider me like this rebel leader. I'm OK with that, right? I'm not here to be a rebel leader. Try and speak sense. And to me, it's not worth it. And I'm not saying I'm going to go to jail for buying a packet of socks, but I don't even want to spend a at the IRS office or an accord defending myself for buying a pack of socks, right? Even if even if I get like a ticket, right? Like, look, there's even if I had the money, the big traffic laws, only because I don't want the hassle of going to court and fighting these tickets, right? So it's a, even if it wasn't about the money, the hassle. And I don't want to deal with the government of the hassle of my Bitcoin spending. Hence, I don't spend Bitcoin and Bitcoin and will generate. But the number one users of Bitcoin are the ones where the activity they're spending Bitcoin on is more illegal than Bitcoin itself or money itself. Why is it good for all of us? Well, no, but I totally understand the other side. I'm just not going to be on that side. Well, it's important to warn people, but people also have to look and say, if you think spending Bitcoin's bad, imagine what it is to create your own currency and all these other things that are going on with a multi-layered things and you make a thing that makes other things and that people invest in that. You have to wonder, will there be some kind of blanket amnesty for a sound like for a spending Bitcoin I could see it happening for creating all these other instruments on your own, will he nilly? Maybe not the US? I don't know. What do you think, Tom? Will he see amnesty? I mean, not really. See, the government is broke. You're not going to see amnesty. You're just going to get bigger and bigger fines. Like, hey, you can get out of this. You know, you have Bitcoin. You can hide it or pass $10,000 coin or $1,000 and you can go. I think the brokenness of a lot of these governments is just going to crank up the fines because it's kind of silly to put people in jail for buying socks in a way they don't like, but they're just going to ramp up the fines. Moving on to the exit question. The crackdown will succeed. I think I already answered it. I mean, it depends on what you consider success. They'll pop a few people, but they're not going to stop it. So I don't know. Did they succeed in stopping music piracy? It's debatable. No, it's actually debatable, right? I mean, the music industry kind of only provided superior services that function similar to the way that piracy does. When I go to Apple Music and say download an album, it just puts it on my computer. It doesn't charge me. It's fantastic. And I think the prices on streaming music are only going to go down. So again, already artists are telling us that they're not making any money off streaming music that Spotify, Apple Music, these services are doing fantastic, but the artists are getting nothing. But the artists will have always been getting nothing. This isn't like a new phenomenon, right? The artists have always been complaining about making nothing. And I'm not sympathetic to the artist. Like, make your money by doing concerts, make your money by doing public appearances. I have... Look, I don't respect someone that makes one hit one there and then expects to make royalties from it the rest of their life. No, the life doesn't owe you that, right? You want to make money? I mean, hell, there are a lot of successful artists, right? Look at Jay-Z, look a lot of other guys. There's plenty of them, right? If you could, you're going to make money. If you're not good and you have one hit song, well, too bad for you, I don't care. It's a completely different kind of thing. It's easier than it ever was before and at the same time it's harder. I'm going to stick with no, even though I think tone speech probably depressed a lot more people than the crackdown will. Moving on to issue two. Issue two. Thank you. China. The people's Republic of China recently regulated their top Bitcoin exchanges, ending margin trading and launching transaction fees. These changes have seemingly caused a 50% drop in Bitcoin volatility. Additionally, the price of Bitcoin on Chinese exchanges, while previously ahead of the rest of the market, has returned to relative parity. I ask you, Thomas Hunt, should Bitcoiners everywhere be thanking China? Now, this is really strange because China pretty much caused the last two major drops in Bitcoin. Every time we get above $1,100, China does something crazy and the whole market goes down and all of the holders lose our shirts. I'm still a little miffed about China for our previous interactions, but I got to say this time, and again, I'm a status and I'm pro-regulation because I like seatbelts and airbags. But these regulations worked. Margin trading, I'm with the 1920s, I still think it's dangerous, charging transaction fees on the transactions rather than bundling them or encouraging people to spend more transactions to get to a lower tier so you pay less to withdraw. I think that's better. That encourages less fake transactions, less volatility, better for Bitcoin. I'm coming out with the Chinese government this time. Tony Vays, your thoughts. Now, I generally agree with that. It's green one more time. Now, see that the tier thing is interesting, right? Because I mean, I'm a traditional trader and it's the same way, right? The more you trade, the cheaper your transactions are. But that's because they want your business for trading so that they can also make more money. That makes sense to me. I got to check my fees, like every broker is negotiable. I got to check my broker at the end of the year. At the end of this year, I'm trading more often. My fees are my transactions are my traditional broker because I take small gains and so option trading is weird. Maybe I'll make $10 or $20,000 at the end of the year, but I might spend $5,000-$6,000 in transaction fees. It's an insane amount compared to my profit. I might call up my broker and say, hey, listen, can you give me a break? I'm paying you a lot. Though it's an international broker, so they're going to laugh at me. You paid us $5,000. We've got to buy our pay us $100,000. Talk to us in about five years when you're making $100,000, but spending $50 on transaction fees. Anyway, I'm getting off topic. So I don't really have a problem with that part, but I'm sharing my screen. I love this sentence right here. I don't bloompark. The sentence before it is really, really good. The closest thing to a supervisor, ensuring the health of the market, has been this month's Chinese crackdown. And then here's my favorite sentence I've read all month. A authoritarian Bitcoin investors can breathe easy. Then a communist government has their back. So I find this hilarious. Now here is the thing though. This article was published one yesterday, today, something like that. Which last night? So here is an article from January 10. So this is two weeks ago. This was published in Coin Idol. They reached out to me for a comment. That's what I told Coin Idol two weeks earlier. I'll read it because this goes to SoundCloud. In fact, I wish PBOC would get a little more involved and perhaps regulate some of their unrealistic volume out of the ecosystem. I like this. I like this a lot. I wanted this for years. People are asking me for comments on the situation now. And I just tell them, I have no comment now. I've had comments for years where I kept saying how the Chinese volume is fake. The zero-featured is stupid. It's all about trading. I hated seeing that 90% of all Bitcoin actions in China. And now we're seeing that it's more like 20 or 30%. Not even. I think it's going to go down. So this was completely ridiculous. It was so blatantly obvious that it frustrated me constantly having to talk about it. Now the Chinese exchanges are not going to be as relevant, of course. And this is a good thing. Now here's the problem. I just talked about all this great thing that came out of China with regulation. The problem is that they're not going to stop here. So an ounce of good is going to be followed by a pound of bad. So this is step one and it's good. But pretty soon they're going to start cracking down on the KYC problem. They're going to start. They're maybe going to show up at all these mining operations. So step one is a great positive. But you know what? That's how almost all regulation works. That's how most laws work. They come about for something good. But then very quickly they over regulate and they over manipulate. So I'm happy about this, but I don't see, but they need to stop right here. Like this is where they need to start. I mean, they can go one step beyond, right? They can stick a regulator at these exchanges. Yeah, let me kill screen share. There's one more additional good step that the Chinese government regulators can do. They, and this would be great. They can stick a regulator. I mean, they will get corrupted, right? They've got to stick like a revolving regulator. They can have one regulator, right? So like every three months, they got to send a new regulator into these or Chinese exchanges. And he would have the specialty of making sure that the reserves are there. So his specialty is to make sure that the Bitcoin is in cold storage or properly stored accounts are segregated if they need to be segregated, right? So this is one small step. A bigger step would be consumer protections on the underlying asset because Bitcoin is a better asset to avoid the next mile. That would be amazing, but they're not going to stop there, right? They're going to go after the KYC. They're going to go after the capital controls of people moving. Now you out of China using Bitcoin, they might go after the mining operations or at least get their cut. That's where we're headed. It's going to be bad. I personally, I mean, I'm risk averse. I'm scared of, and I don't want to, again, I don't want to spread a fad, but this is what I'm thinking. I wouldn't have my money in a Chinese exchange for the fear that the Chinese government is going to confiscate foreign or Bitcoin. Well, they'll leave their Chinese citizens alone, but they'll confiscate foreigners, right? They'll just, uh, forpaste these Chinese exchanges to make an announcement, please KYC yourself. And if you can't KYC as a Chinese national, then your coins have been confiscated. And there is nothing anyone will be able to do about it. The Chinese exchanges will still survive because there is enough local Chinese demand and the government doesn't go after them. This is no different than a country defaulting on foreign debt, but not defaulting on internal debt. And the reason, I think the part of this goes into what I was going to say, Tony, where I was going to say that what we have to look at now is I want to stick, I want to stick with the Chinese government. I'm not sure that regulation will be bad in the future because I'm seeing now a trilateral world where the US, Russia, and China are now very much at odds with each other and Bitcoin and perhaps is in the middle of this. Maybe the Chinese, it's in their interest to use Bitcoin to keep it free. Maybe it's in the Russians interest. Perhaps it's in the American. Maybe it shifts around. But I'm seeing all aspects of that and I do agree with you though, they could seize foreigner Bitcoin. We just had one of the regulations gone through where Trump said basically that foreigners have no privacy, that all the data that's now stored in the US, the US government can just go through. And if the Chinese government or the Russians or the Britain or anyone were to retaliate and to say US records have no privacy, I could see that happening. US Bitcoin's in their accounts are not on. But we've always suggested that people should take their coins off the exchange at night. I guess that's difficult if you're in a USD or in a currency. It's just a complex situation. But, sir. Man, I'm having all these technical issues. I don't know what the hell is up on my camera going on. But no, and that's true. And that's true. That's what worries me now as far as Bitcoin being in the middle of a feud between military powers, we might be five years early on this story. We're way ahead of it. A lot of this seems like stuff we've always talked about. But now it's coming home with the tax issue. We've always talked about this with the exchanges being questionable. We've always talked. But now it just happens over. And yeah, it may be upon in this world. Right. No, it could. But you need way more value on chain. Right now it will be stupid for these countries to be Bitcoin in the middle of it because any government, we're not even talking top three. We're talking like the 50th largest government has enough cash to completely screw with the price of Bitcoin. Right. It doesn't take much. You throw like 50 million Bitcoin and you're going to cause all kinds of havoc. So until the market cap of Bitcoin is at a point where a government can just like easily manipulated, then we can start seeing some of this regulation or Bitcoin in the middle of this regulation of country's jocke for position. But I wouldn't even think about that until the price of one Bitcoin is crossing like $50,000. Right. Until it's doing that, Bitcoin is fairly insignificant. It's more like, I don't know, some people are in the government that are complaining and the government needs to do something. Right. I don't even know. Like it's, I'm sorry guys, Bitcoin isn't that important in the world yet. The word yet. And moving on to the exit question. On a scale of zero to 10, zero being absolutely nothing, zip, zero, but kiss and 10 being absolute metaphysical certitude. Will the success of these regulations ensure a positive future for Bitcoin and China? Toned vase. Um, man, this is again, this is such a hard question, right? Like if this is where they leave the regulation, then I would, then I would give it like, a six, that's a good thing, right? That it improves. Right. I would give it like a six. If they go one step further and try to create consumer protection without knowing who the consumer is, I would give it like a nine. But after that, they're going to add more regulation on top of that and it's going to slowly go down back to zero where it's going to be a complete disaster. So there you go. The answer is eight. Very bullish on the future of Bitcoin and China. Coming on issue three, Satoshi, who the one secret, but constantly press seeking Satoshi roundtable conference took place this weekend with more rumors being spread about the creator of Bitcoin, including rumors involving Craig Wright and perhaps a company who will attempt to claim intellectual property created by that group. There are no sources and there are no quotes. But the article claims that major news outlets are investigating. Tones are you Satoshi Nakamoto? If not, who is? Is it this right, fellow? And does it matter? Well, it's obvious. It clearly doesn't matter. That's the easy one to answer. Am I Satoshi? That's also an easy one to answer. Those that have had that would be no, I'm not Satoshi. I would definitely, you know, if you were hedging there for a minute. We were expecting a yes. Yeah, sure. Why not? Yes, I'm Satoshi. We're also Satoshi. So, I don't even want to talk about Craig Wright. Why is this in coin desk? Why is this news? Oh my God. I was on another channel today and people talked about Craig Wright. I'm like, why? I didn't even know this made an article. This keeps happening though. In the highest circles. No, I didn't. The most connected people they tell me, big announcement, Craig Wright, big announcement this and then it happens. And then this one, this one I'm getting on the front of, we're saying we're going to the front. We're saying it's happening again, big announcement, Craig Wright. Here we go. This keeps happening because coin desk is just a terrible news organization now. I used to really like coin desk. They were like my favorite news organization. I can't read them anymore. I don't even go to coin desk anymore other than to check, you know, if I want to see where events are around the world. The only usefulness I find out of coin desk these days is their event page because they keep track of the events around the world. I can't believe Peter Rizzo of all people wrote this non-story article. Like he's invited to the Satoshi Roundtable. I'm not invited to the Satoshi Roundtable. Is this the best thing you came up with out of the Satoshi Roundtable? Do some real content. Nobody cares. Let the tabloid media do this. I'm like, it's like every month I get more and more disappointed by coin desk between letting people like Wiggly, Wiggly, Galar Wright articles and constantly pitching a theorem and Z-cash and it's literally unreadable and they're supposed to be the standard for Bitcoin news. It's absolutely terrible. I'm going to actually apply to be a speaker at their conference. I just want that rejection letter. I want to keep like emailing them. I've been needing to do it for weeks. I'm going to try to be a speaker at that conference. I was at that conference last year. There was maybe five to seven speakers out of like 50 that I'm worth listening to and everybody else was a complete joke. It's bad. It's really bad. It's a strange world where a white paper gets you $5 million. I'm not sure why that keeps happening but we keep seeing it. This is a totally round table thing. Seems like it's gone downhill. I've seen recaps of the event every year. It seems like every year they try to define Bitcoin. It's a little team building group exercise. It's getting pretty old, seeing the leaked video or the shots of this every year. Also they keep having it a club med which is apparently a very family friendly environment. I'm not sure what they're up to anymore but more power to them. One last comment and this is funny. Again, I perceive certain things as important and certain things as not important. This is why I'm just slow reader because I will pick out the one sentence in a long article that I find important when I know one else sees that sentence. The rest of the article is people are finding stuff important that I'm not here. I mean, I don't always do that but what I do at school, it's very different at least. I remember when the first social round table was happening, I knew where it was because my name was thrown into the hat as a suggestion. I knew where it was going to happen. I didn't even know it was going to be the social round table. I was just informed. There will be a conference in the Dominican Republic and we'll see if we can get you in. I'm like, oh great. That was three or four months before the event. Then with two weeks before the event, somebody did a reverse Google search on an image of the hotel in order to discover where was happening. It hit like, I forgot which I think it was CCN. CryptoCoin's news published it and everybody went crazy about this. Jackal Island style, Bitcoin round table and all this. I was writing for Coin Telegram at the time. I remember in our group chat, I was like, wait, is this the Dominican Republic event? I'm like, I knew about this for months. I knew exactly where it was. Everyone at Coin Telegram started yelling at me. Why didn't you break the story? Why didn't you do it? I'm like, and I remember typing it. I didn't think it was important. I didn't care. It's just a bunch of people. Just a bunch of early big cleaners. Just want to hang around, talk shit without newbies and all this stuff. The only reason why you're interested in going is because a bunch of them are going. If only one of them was going, you wouldn't care. Because all of them are in the same room, you want to go. It would have been kind of cool to be there, but I didn't care. I didn't see it as a conspiracy from the beginning. I didn't find this all that newsworthy. This Satoshi round table came and I didn't even know what was happening until the day it was already happening. It's so non-use at this point. There is a little bit of history to this. A lot of Bitcoin people are kind of conspiratorial. They don't like the Build a Bird group with a similar group that meets every year and supposedly plans the economy or whatever you want to say. There's also a lot around the framing of this using Satoshi's name at the same time tying it to the round table. King Arthur the Knights, a British tradition there and other conspiracy symbol. I had a lot of negative and then there was something in the original invitation where he said, I know some of you have been in Bitcoin a long time but you're not going to be invited to this event. There's some kind of shitting on the libertarian early participants in the invitation. I don't know if it's intentional or not, but it rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. It did create a big buzz the first year, but I'm sure you were called last year, Tony. They held it somewhere in Florida and the Bitcoin Uncensored guy showed up, did a bunch of podcasts. They had some negative reaction, but then I think the people that came off best were the ones that went on their show, spoke to them, didn't treat them like lepers or try to get them kicked out of the property or whatever they try to do now. But that was great. And again, that conference with them was way more interesting than whatever happened this weekend because whatever happened this weekend we didn't hear about. So once again media bringing value to an event. Right, but again, right, that article, like I don't know what else Peter Rizzo wrote. I'm sure he was there. He's got a lot of these events. I don't know what else he wrote about it, but he's not going to provide the kind of content that Bitcoin Uncensored can provide. He's not going to provide the kind of content that mean you can provide if we were invited there to cover it because we speak for ourselves. We don't get a paycheck from an organization. We don't get paid for more clicks. So the kind of content that in the media can provide is very, very different than others. And it was great that Bitcoin Uncensored guys were able to show up at the last one because it was literally, which was stupid on the, I'm there part, but hey, that's what you get. And I would have loved to go to the camera. I remember when it happened and Bruce Venton got on there like it was a big conspiracy. The Bitcoin Uncensored guys went to all this work to put on some brairos and ruin his fancy party. And like you say, it turned out it was in their backyard. It was in their neighborhood. It was just ridiculous. Well, let's move on to the exit question. Exit question. Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto or on a team of people that created Satoshi Nakamoto? Yes or no? Force prediction. I don't know, if I had to pick out of those, I would say probably on the team. If assuming there's a team, he was probably on the team, but I'd say he had a very minimal role on that team. So he can't really come out and show his role because it would be like insanely small. Like, you can look at how many lines of code Mike Harn committed into Bitcoin, you know, his three years of working there trying to code for Bitcoin. And you'll see like, it's probably like a very insignificant role because he has a PhD in cryptography. So I'm sure he knows this space and he might have been consulted. Like again, I'm just like speculating here because this is what we do. I would think he was kind of involved to the point where he can fake to be Satoshi. And perhaps he knows enough that the real Satoshi wouldn't come out where some of the other people wouldn't come out to like expose themselves to expose him. Not really knows the early days. Pull off him being Satoshi and taking credit. So that's my best answer. I'm sticking with the how Finny is Satoshi story. It makes the most sense. He's talking to himself. He's having conversations. Someone I need someone to test the network and someone appeared. He was the perfect tester. And then I turned my computer off for a while and forgot about Bitcoin. And then obviously unfortunately for Mr. Finny, the sickness of the disease, which also fits into the timeline of Satoshi disappearing. So that's what we're going with here. And we're moving on to issue four issue four, great wall of America. Despite our continued insistence that fixed fortification such as walls are monuments to this stupidity of man. The Trump administration has announced this week that they are beginning preparations to build the Mexican border wall via executive action. As of yet, there is no plan to deal with the difficult terrain, general logistics, tribal land issues and the cost of building a 40 foot high border wall in a 1900 mile border. But some have said it could be done through a 20 percent tax on Mexican imports, including all the commas. Others have said it could be done through a tax on remittance. If remittance, the act of immigrants generally poor sending money home to their families is taxed and taxed excessively. Will Mexican remittance move to Bitcoin? Once again, is Trump good for Bitcoin tone phase? Dude, if Trump raises the price of my avocados, you will see like literally cursing on this channel like you've never heard before. It's a great topic, but they have already retreated from the 20 percent tax. But again, this just shows test balloons. They're putting out the ideas and where they touched a nerve with the avocado wire. No, no, you will touch my nerve if you raise the price of the coddles, like permanently. Well, I'm okay with fluctuations in seasonal farming markets. I literally eat multiple avocados a day, so they're not cheap here. We also need to remind everyone it's winter here in the US. All the fruit in the market is from Mexico, all the vegetables. If we have a rise on imports from Mexico, we're essentially raising the price on healthy food, which is going to kill a lot of people that can't afford healthy food. But again, we've made choices. All right, so this would be good for Bitcoin if he starts messing with the remittance market to Mexico. It would also be kind of dangerous. I mean, you really don't want to piss off Mexico that much. The wall somewhat makes sense, but it doesn't really have to be a physical wall. It could be just, right, and make it easier for people with US passports, make it harder for people with Mexican passports. The thing you can do, I mean, look, we have technology. We have drone technology. You have motion sensors. You have infrared cameras. You can do this. You can secure the border without a wall for God's sakes, right? You just utilize the technology. Ask Google to help you. I'm sure they have, or have Google launch some satellites. I don't understand why we're building the Chinese wall like it's 3,000 years ago when we have all this technology. Spoiler alert. The president comes from a construction company. He comes from a construction background. There's a very good possibility that what we're seeing here is a setup for kickbacks. Kickbacks to build the wall. Kickbacks to build the infrastructure. Maybe we could build a bridge to Europe or something while we're at this. We could go to Mars. Yeah. Yeah. No, so that part frustrates me. Like I'm all for securing the border, but there's smarter ways to do it. And that's what bothers me. Like every time I hear Trump talking about the wall, I put that together with like the movie that's supposed to come out like the Great Wall of China. I don't know if you've seen the trailers. It could just be all cross promotion for the Mad Damon movie. This whole thing the whole time. Right. So that. All right. But let's take it back to Bitcoin. Right. So if he messes with the remittance market, Bitcoin becomes very, very useful and it helps the price of Bitcoin. I'm also learning something interesting. I hear that the price of Bitcoin on the street in California is actually below the spot price, which means there is more Bitcoin being sold in California than there is demand for Bitcoin. So why how can that be? Last I heard there aren't these giant mining farms in California. And as far as I know, the marijuana dealers aren't all too keen on Bitcoin for obvious reasons, which I'm not going to get into on this channel, but we can talk about another different topic. So to me, this says that there is a much easier time acquiring Bitcoin in Mexico and then taking your Bitcoin over the border and selling it in the US to get US dollars. Interesting dynamic. So that means Bitcoin is flowing from Mexico into America via California and maybe Texas. But California has more techy people than Texas does. So doing it the other way would be interesting, right? Because now there'll be demand for Bitcoin in California, Mexico. So this is good. I mean, Trump will just balance it out. I'm not going to speculate on what he does. People will find a way around it. If it's not Bitcoin, it will be something else. It shouldn't be that hard to route value from US to Mexico, especially if you're near the border. I mean, your company, I mean, man, if you're like a corona manufacturer or a corona reseller, right? It's like an American beer that pretends to be Mexican. So you have to have a Mexico relationship there, right? At least pretend like you're bottling it in Mexico and bringing it back. I mean, there's lots of businesses on the border between Mexico and that would like solve your remittance problem. I'll wait for the details. It's there's all this noise. And at the end, it's going to be like a whimper, right? There's really not much you can do. You're talking millions and millions of people. You're going to disrupt them. It's not an easy task. So we'll see. I think it's first important to establish here that there are two sides to a trade war. If we raise the 20% on the avocados, they'll raise 20% on something else. I think we've forgotten this with the negotiator in charge. And certainly it won't affect him. He'll be fine. But real people will be affected by these trade wars. Real people will be affected by this new dynamic strategy of saying, I'm going 100% and then they say, how about 50? You say, how about 75? We say 65. We say 70. We had to start at 100% to get there. I understand the negotiating tactics, but it is terrifying. And I agree with you, Tony. I think we should have been electric. Go ahead. Well, not electric. I mean, I don't want to electrocute people. I mean, I'm an electronic with the drones, but you're going to talk more. So I was going to let you talk. Think back to the avocados, right? Like you can't raise the packs on avocados because we're the ones who are paying the packs. If you want to tax them on something, you got to tax them on something that they're buying from us, not something that we're buying from them. That's just retarded, right? If you tax avocados, pay for that. So we're paying for the war in that case, not them, right? You got to find something that we give them. All right, if you're going to put a legalized drugs and put a tax on that, we're paying for that, right? They're probably manufactured. They're brought here. So you got to figure out what Mexicans need from us and tax that. Maybe it's medicine. Maybe it's legal drugs, right? Maybe it's... Well, there's a great popular issue, taxing prescription drugs. Once again, life and death. It's a money issue. Right. Everyone gets pissed at that guy. I always forget his name. That raised the guy. Schifrelli or something like that, the AIDS drug. Yeah. Schifrelli or whatever his name is. Everyone is pissed at him. For raising the price of a drug, again, I like Trump, but no one is giving Trump a hard time when he says we're doing all of the drugs and we're manufacturing everything. So what if Trump raises the price of all drugs to the third world? Does everyone give him the same scooting? They gave Schifrelli or whatever his name is? I think they will. They also think it's important to say what happened in the EpiPen market. Congress was very upset. They raised the price on EpiPens. A couple of months later, they developed a generic EpiPen and now the whole market is in turmoil. So this can happen. You can't be disrupted even in the tightly patented drug market. I was going to agree with you, Tone. I think the border should be made out of drones, electronic measures, cameras, things like this. There's other options, especially given the terrain in some of the sections. Certainly some of the flatter sections could be walled if this is necessary by presidential order. But I was also going to say that the medical marijuana issue, there was an interesting bill we didn't bring it on the show, but they tried to ban Bitcoin for recreational marijuana in Seattle in Washington. And there's just very bizarre to ban a form of payment for a, definitely for a good or commodity. It's just a bill it's not going to pass. But the fact that someone could submit this and write it down on papers, very strange. What do you think, Tone? I've never thought, I heard of some other case where they said, you can't buy this specific thing with that specific money. I haven't heard of it, but also because no one's ever really tried to accept any other thing for other money, except libertarians, right? I mean, this isn't completely normal. People have gold silver. Yeah, but just again, just libertarians, right? Like no businesses would opt for that. It's a little bit weird, but you also have to remember that it's weird to us. It may not be weird to some regulator that all he hears about is Bitcoin is used for prostitution and terrorism. I see it where they're coming from. And marijuana businesses don't want Bitcoin. And I learned this when I was in Colorado. The reason marijuana businesses don't want Bitcoin is because they know they're breaking the law. They're breaking federal law, right? This is why people who play like, yeah, I can sit here and talk crap about Bitcoin being illegal, but that's because I consider any form of payment in America that's not government legal tender is borderline illegal, right? Like I'd say the same thing about paying someone else in gold. And it's a good point about the capital controls that if money is coming in and going to marijuana, it could for all their intensive purposes because they don't know where it goes, it could go to terrorism. So by that logic, you have to control it. You have to regulate it. Right. And what happens with these marijuana dispensaries is that they know they're breaking federal law. So even though they're safe from the state police not breaking down their door, they have no idea if the FBI is going to walk in there one day and these people aren't stupid. They know that Bitcoin isn't the same gray area. One day it's legal. One day it's not legal. This agency calls it this. This agency calls it that. So why would they want to mix a gray element of their business with another gray element of their business making their entire business more, more gray towards the black, like drifting towards the black market? There's absolutely no incentive there to do this. And just one quick example on the gold thing, this might need to be fact check, but I did hear the story. Like one guy decided to, you know, be sneaky and he bought like a luxury, a used luxury car like a BMW or something for like $20,000, but he paid that person borders. So if you add up the face value of the quarter, it only adds up to like less than $1,000, like $500. So he's buying this like $20,000 car for $500 in legal tender, but the silver content in the quarters added up to like $20,000. And I think both of these guys ended up in legal trouble. And they were technically using legal tender, right? So again, the laws are very, very murky. You think you're doing everything because there's no law that's saying you can't until you realize they didn't need a law saying you can't, you just couldn't do it. I agree for simplicity's sake, it's best to only break one law at a time. Everyone remember, they got Al Capone for tax evasion. If he agrees with taxes, theoretically it's still be bootleg. I agree, definitely try to break one law at a time. It's when you're doing two, it's a problem. I think it's out of control. Let's move on to the exit question. Is local bitcoins quietly becoming the only killer app that Bitcoin has ever needed? I, yeah, yes, I can't think of anything else. Are you doing your wallet, though? I mean, wallets are a killer app, a physical and actual app. All it's a local bitcoins because you need to put those Bitcoin somewhere. Agree. Local bitcoins is a centralized institution. If you put funds in there, they're centralized. All of your information is centralized. But if you look at it from a larger perspective, the ability for two bitcoins to meet up and make a trade in public is a killer app. It's unbelievable. It's geography, it's geotagged, it has the mapping. It's the thing they've been looking for. But we keep quietly overlooking it because like everything in Bitcoin, it seems to have two uses. It empowers you to meet up and make a fair transaction, but it also empowers you to make a lot of other questionable transactions. No one has any idea why they're going on. But let's move on to predictions or a story of the week. Toned Vays, are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? I'm actually not. I've been earning season for me, so I'm barely paying attention to Vays. Bitcoin, I like the fact that the price is back up up 9.15. So my prediction, I've been very bullish on price across all time frames over the last month or two, even maybe a few months now. And this is good. If we close on Sunday above 9.15, I will be very bullish Bitcoin as it goes on its way to $1,000 and I think fairly quickly with or without segwit. So I guess my prediction is the price. Also I want to do a couple of plugs. I'm too lazy to share a screen right now. Definitely check out my new podcast, Crypto Scam. I think it's a good new idea. And if you're near Toronto, please come out February 6th. I am speaking, Peter Todd is speaking. I will be about to read of 400 people in attendance. It's only $10 Canadian, which is like $7 US or something. So you can't beat the deal. It'll be a better conference than consensus that charges you like $8,000 to attend. Just by you just here in me and Peter Todd that evening, it'll be like one or two other speakers. But you'll definitely get your money's worth if you've never attended a Bitcoin conference before. This is probably the best bank for the buck. Excellent. And I didn't really prepare anything for a story of the week, but I just would like to say, I and the rest of the liberal snowflakes continue to be terrified by almost every action of the new Trump administration. And as you guys know, and as Tony just said, terror is good for business. Bitcoin goes up because of uncertainty. And there is nothing but uncertainty coming out of this new administration with exciting new executive orders every day. A questionable relationship with our best trading partner, Mexico. We still haven't met with the great Britain, our former good friends. But there seems to be sign that we're going to give up the Russian sanctions for nothing soon. So I don't know what's going on in this big, big world. But here's the thing, right? With all this uncertainty, look at the stock market, doubt 20,000, we're going to all time highs. That is not normal. Uncertainty brings crashes in the stock market, but we're going up. So all this uncertainty is just bullshit. I'm sorry, guys, people with money are not uncertain. People with money are clearly very happy. And they're putting that money in corporations, in companies because they think the taxes will go down. So this is like leftist media that is telling you that there's all this uncertainty with Trump. They'll follow the money. To any and all your questions is money. And the money is going into the stock market while gold's going down. So this should tell you where the, this is right now. What is the old saying, even a dead cat can bounce? I'm not so sure, Tony. But we'll have to hang on and see how it goes. But we're out of time. Until next time. Bye, bye. Bye, bye. Bye, bye.