The Bitcoin Group, the American original. For over the last 10 seconds, the sharpest Satoshi's, the best Bitcoin's, the hardest cryptocurrency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists, Jimmy Song, Bitcoin developer. Tongue Vays from Liberty Life Trail. Hi everyone. Jeffrey Jones from the Bitcoin News Show. Hey everybody, thanks for joining. Blake Anderson, cryptographic economist. Hey everybody, thanks for having me. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World of Crypto Network. Live from Minnesota. Yeah. How about that? Moving on to issue one. Issue one. Public service announcement. Bitcoin.com. The domain name owned by Bitcoin Unlimited Supporter Roger Veer has taken the unusual step this week of warning their visitors about a problem with what the Bitcoin.com website calls the Bitcoin Core Plus Blockstream team. Saying that their solution to scaling is transforming Bitcoin into a settlement layer with high fees instead of a fast, affordable and reliable payments network. Meanwhile, Gregory Maxwell's assertion that the mining shifts used by Bitmain may contain ASIC Boost software that allows them to mine 30% faster has ignited a political element of the Bitcoin community, which now seems to be out in the street with pitchforks and torches screaming UASF or user activated software. The price of Bitcoin took notice dropping to 1175. Jimmy Song, are we closer now to a solution to Bitcoin scaling or further away? We were never really close. I don't think we've been close. It's been two years. It's not close now. We're not much closer in any sense of the word for the last two years. I don't think the user activated software that the community has been getting behind Bit 148. I think that was shot down pretty much by Greg Maxwell earlier today and is emailed to the dev list. I think he's got a really good point. I personally don't think it would work because miners are the only ones really with the skin in the game in that particular UASF proposal. This whole thing reminds me of a price fight. You're trying to arrange it. There's a lot of money involved. This may weather Pacquiao and takes five years to happen. That's where we are. It's already been two years. Get ready for at least another year. The big reason why this is happening is that his core is extremely dominant on the development side. Bit main is extremely dominant on the mining side. You really don't have any competitors for either. They're kind of clashing against themselves. I believe that Greg Maxwell and his article, and with his death post earlier today, he's positioning himself for a different user activated software come November. That seems like a reasonable thing to try. Yeah, scaling just won't be solved anytime soon. It's going to be at least six months before anything happens. Another year at least, for now. Just reminder to all our viewers, make sure to like and share this video. Thank you so much for watching. Tell them the days. I was really hoping that one ASIC boost information came out. It would actually have a huge boost toward Segwit because I even tweeted out all of these people that realized that they were being taken for a fool by Bitmain and why they weren't supporting Segwit would now realize that they've been supporting the wrong side. Even thought that Roger might be one of these people. Instead, Roger is doubling down on the insanity of wanting two different Bitcoins. I think it's this graceful that he's using Bitcoin.com website for this public service announcement. Roger Vero wants $100 fees because he continues to create opposition to a scaling solution that would lower those fees almost to zero with Lightning. The longer he is charged against Segwit's witness, the longer it will take for Lightning and the longer Bitcoin is able to scale. In the meantime, his friend, Chihon Wu, has an advantage mining more coins. If the other miners feel like Bitcoin Core isn't doing everything they can to even out the playing field, they might just say, fuck it and leave. It means if Bitfury to close up shop and leave, almost dies because no one would trust the Bitcoin network with a single mining chip manufacturer. Especially when that mining chip manufacturer can make a chip with Asik Boost for themselves and without Asik Boost for their competitors. They're already ripping off their competitors by selling them their mining equipment, which they're probably getting, which should probably be like, they're selling it today but like double the markup. Anyone buying their equipment, anyone buying their equipment is already behind the ball, basically. This is what we have and I was always okay with status quo, pre Asik Boost for relations. Now that Asik Boost for relations is out there, I feel that the mining, the playing field needs to be even out. I will support a user activated software even though two or three weeks ago, that's something I really really wanted. That's where I am. Bitcoin unlimited can't possibly work. It basically guarantees us two bitcoins. The moment segregated witness was designed as a soft fork, that was the one and only solution and there's just no other way about it. Agreed to the larger problem is mining centralization and the solution may be to push through this change even if the miners don't like it. Jeffrey Jones. I have a lot of sorry. I have a lot of as there as well. I know there's a couple of other mining manufacturers but I mean Bitfury is the only one because they have like, you know, 15% of pool. Anyway, it's going to get bad. If the playing field isn't even downed. There's certainly no reason for a new mining company to enter a field where a competitor has a 30% advantage. That makes no sense. Jeffrey Jones. Yeah. I mean, as it stands right now, they're making way too much profit for other players not to enter in the space at some point. You know, I mean, we'll see how it goes. But I have to agree with Tony, this PSA on their website was absolutely disgraceful. It's funny how they screen censorship all over that PSA. But there's no information about Bitcoin core anywhere on the biggest thing. If Roger so upset about our Bitcoin trying to remove some BU posts, then maybe they should he should put some Bitcoin core information on Bitcoin.com. But as it stands right now, he does not. So it's just completely ridiculous. And you know, just recently, Beauty on Put Out A Pull about how many people actually go, how many people have actually visited or go to internet.com. And so far off the hundreds and hundreds of votes. That's what nobody has ever gone to internet.com. Like I myself have a web developer of over 10 years. I have never gone to internet.com. So we hope that that eventually won't really matter. We hope that Bitcoin.com will matter in the future. But it's interesting. You know, this debate is definitely got some more legs. It's going to be going on for definitely after, you know, so Segwood, if Segwood doesn't get activated, then you could definitely bet another. If Segwood does get activated, then we're good, right? But if Segwood doesn't get activated, you're looking at another year plus of scaling debate. And I just will eventually get there. But it's been a bit of a rough patch. And you know, I personally think that it's been an amazing journey. I mean, everybody's learned a lot in these past couple of years. And we're finally starting to kind of get, we're definitely past the middle, you know, so we're finally starting to see maybe the light at the end of the tunnel. But it's going to be going on for a little while longer. It's good. I was going to say one thing before Blake before I was going to say one thing to make that. The thing is like Roger is like complaining that old coins are taken over. But the reason why that's happening is because every time he says something like puts out this public service announcement, the price of Bitcoin drops and Ethereum goes up and Dash goes up and Litecoin goes down. Like I was looking at the charts like over the last 24 hours. Bitcoin and Litecoin are totally correlated. They're negatively correlated with Ethereum and Dash. And every and the moment Bitcoin unlimited and big blockers have any kind of momentum, the price of Bitcoin immediately falls at the expense of Ethereum and like Dash and some of the other scam coins. So I mean, he's causing this, right? Like Roger is complaining that Bitcoin, that old coins are eating its lunch right because of you. Man, they're already fully converted to them. I don't know. It's crazy. And meanwhile, if you look at the bitfinex numbers, right? The Bitcoin unlimited coin, the BCC is like a, or the BCU $20 or less. It's under $120. While BCC is over 1000, I mean, it just keeps getting more and more further away. The debate continues. Blake Anderson. Well, I think that having a public service announcement is kind of a funny way to go about things. I mean, like, if you're a scientist and you want empiricism to be the way that people move forward, I mean, that's good. You can have risk management standards. And then if you have something like Bitcoin, you can say, here are the arguments that make this better or worse. But by the time you're like, here's a public service announcement. Let me take a whole bunch of nascent people that are uninvolved and then try to make an argument that's going to chop up what's convenient for my cherry pick stance. I mean, there's a reason that I think that block stream doesn't get a whole bunch of nascent people in because it's not really productive for them to be like, we're going to teach them our version of the argument and have them go out and do that. I think the best way to develop technology is by having developed the schedules that are tenable and that are involved with risk management. And especially if you're going to have a global value material transfer system. I mean, I've pretty much been making the same arguments since my current in XT and they keep coming up again and again and again. And I urge people to remember that all this stuff has happened before. To remember Rogers' role in it and remember Bitcoin.com, somebody had said in the chat that it was Paul Green, that.com is commercial.org is org. And with TCPIP, be like TCPIP.com or would it be.org? And I think that's a org is probably closer to what that would be. Hopefully, it would be closer to what Bitcoin should be and maybe keep that in mind. I mean, is that going to be a strong reason? Don't worry, it's org.com. That's not what I'm trying to say. That be the skeptical of anything that seems to be trying to get more of the peanut gallery to weigh in instead of making a real, real strong argument to stand on its own merit. And let's also be clear that what we're talking about is Bitcoin.com, which really is something that comes up in Google search engine. And what we know now with the fake news debacle is that sites like Facebook and Google are actually interested in whether your news site is real or fake. And we know that Bitcoin.com, if they continue putting out this false information, they're going to be labeled as fake news and they're going to lose their position in the Google search results, which is pretty much like losing their importance and their value. So what you're seeing is how fake can they go before they lose all of their credibility, which is losing all of their value. So you're watching a company destroy itself. Go ahead, Tom. Well, here's a question. How often do you hear of a public service announcement being like a debatable issue, right? Like I'm used to it being like Amber alerts or something, right? Exactly. And that's what we're seeing. We're seeing how embarrassing and overstepped this is and how, once again, not to be insulting to Roger, but to be mildly critical and to say we have some very contentious points here and he's giving them away. When I interviewed him a few weeks ago, he gave away the news that he intended to sell his Bitcoin to buy Bitcoin unlimited. People had speculated on this, but he gave the news away. Now we've speculated for a long time that he would quote unquote use Bitcoin.com to influence the argument, but one would assume that he would influence it in an artful way by directing his articles or directing his comments or some kind of artful persuasion. But what we've seen is this clunky public service announcement, which is just very blatant and very false and not a public service announcement. And computer science and journalistic ethics, basically the way that you deal with certain things, like there are standards for this. There are definite standards for it and there are also standards for open source software development and for not releasing closed binary things like that. So when you see a trend in multiple different areas where there are standards of those standards being castrated, that's a very, very, very, very strong signal to be like, whoa, let's look at the way that these people go about things and make sure that risk management has been applied. Not that they're the only people that that should be applied to, but risk management and computer science, especially when you're at the forefront, is extremely important. Agreed. Let's move on to the exit question. Exit question on a scale of zero to 10 with zero being zipped, zilt, nothing, and 10 being absolute metaphysical certitude. How closer we to coming up with a solution to the Bitcoin scaling debate, Jimmy Sallam. Two, there's no way, there's no way where anywhere near close. And I wrote about this in an article earlier that I released last night. It made this huge. You guys have to understand they make a lot of money and they are the 900 pound gorilla in the mining industry. You're not going to get rid of them very easily. Neither are you going to get rid of poor. And really, it's, you know, it is this double force versus immovable object at this point. That's not going to go away easily by any stretch of the imagination. I mean, you could drop a nuclear bomb and change the proof of work or like come in with like 10 new developers and do something like that, but it's just not going to happen. Two out of 10 at the most. And I think that's being optimistic. It sounds like you're describing the new Thor Ragnarok trailer. And I want to see the whole fight him too. Toned vase. Oh, man, that's a tough question. I mean, we have a scaling solution. The question is how close are we to actually implementing it? And I'm going to give it a six. I want to be a little more optimistic. I mean, given it a five, just seems silly. So I had to pick one way or another. So I'm going to give it a six. I think, right there, I think by the end of this year, you know, there will be clarity on segwit. I mean, it's if bit main is a real company, like a real company, not a, not a Bitcoin thing that somebody did in their basement launching an IPO, right? I mean, if it means a real company, a structured like a real company, they have a board of directors. And this board of directors will come down and get rid of Jihang Wu. Again, if they're structured like a real company with a board of directors, if they're not, and they are like a typical Bitcoin company, then yeah, this might last for a while. Jeffrey Jones. Yep. So I'm going to have to give it around, I was already going to say about five or six, but six is about right because we really are over the hump. We're over the middle part. We have a tested scaling solution ready to go today segway, right? So it's just like the tone set of matter is if how long till we implement it? So, you know, bit main, it is a big company. It is huge, but like I said, their profits are huge as well. They're not going to last that long being that big. There's just too, there's just too much profit. Somebody's going to come in there and, and, and, and, and, you know, fill the space. Bit main is not going to be the biggest forever. And so, you know, that's one point I wanted to make, you know, as far as giving it a timeline, like, you know, segway, we will get clarity at the end of the year, but I have to say that it can't, if segway doesn't get activated, it can't last much more than a year after segway, you know, but I guess it can, right? So, it's been a last thing. I'm going to have to say a six. Yeah. Okay. Can't just have one more thing. They're profitable now, right? But if they continue, if they continue not to support segway, the price of Bitcoin will not go up as fast. So they are not going to be this profitable in the near future. Now if their goal is to eliminate all competition because the price of Bitcoin isn't going up, and now they become the one and only minor, what the hell are they going to mind? They're going to mind, like, literally, bit main coin because no one's going to use Bitcoin, right? So, and, while, meanwhile, difficulties going up because they're selling their own chips everywhere, right? So that's going to end also. So they're only profitable now. Although, it's fine. You know what coin did turn out well for Bitfix. Sorry. Go ahead, Jim. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, it's true competition bit main, but the lead times on, like, manufacturing, micro processors and things like that, it's like six to 12 months. It's not going to happen overnight. It's possible Intel or Samsung or somebody huge is already looking into, like, creating miners or something, which case that might come a little faster. But this is not something, this is not a business that you can get into in a month later, produce like mining chips. This is an extremely hard, like, business to figure out, and this is why Bitmain's dominating, right? Because they figured out the entire supply chain. They know which foundries to use, and they're selling these chips fed in Normans, profit. I mean, Tony, I don't know if you read my article from last night, but they are making like 200 to $250 million a year, at least. And that's an insane number, right? I know. Jimmie, Jay, but that's about to change, right? If they continue doing what they're doing, and every time they announce that they don't support Segwit, the price of Bitcoin drops, they're the ones that are suffering the most, because who the hell is going to buy their chips? If Bitcoin is going through this, you know, civil war, who's going to be mining Bitcoin? Well, tone, tone. They go up, and their profits will suffer more than anyone else. Well, they remember, these guys have been around when Bitcoin was like 250, 300, and they survived just fine, right? Like, I figured out their break even point. They can have Bitcoin drop down all the way to $430, and they would still break even on their mining operation. They would still make money on like selling the miners. They're not going away any time soon, and they have a huge war chest from profits in the last three or four years. I would bet you they have like $300, $400 million of the bank. Jimmy, if they have $200 million, why don't they hire a better press agency? Number one. They probably do in China, but yeah. But Jimmy, but you're looking at it in a vacuum, right? What happens to the users of Bitcoin if the price continuously drops every time there is a public service announcement from Roger? First of all, the hate on Roger and on Bitmain is going to go out of control. People will user activate soft fork. People will, this is just normal internet hate. People have their money in this. People get even more upset. They've been incentivized hate. People will demand the proof of work changes. Like you're looking at it in a vacuum, like the price drops to $400, and no one is bothered by this, right? I mean, I'm saying people would be bothered. I'm just saying they're going to last way longer than you think. I mean, like if it drops to $500 tomorrow, they're still making money, like a lot of money. I'm sick. And Jimmy, if you could ask Charles to face, if it goes to $300, they're going to start to hurt. We just need one of those charts where it's how much it goes down and how much they hurt. And there's a point in the middle where they're like, maybe we shouldn't do that. And how much do we have to suffer before? I think you're overestimating the community reaction. Like forcing them to make a change. Well, I also think that you're just a little bit overestimating how long bit may it can be. I'm the one who's underestimating it. Because for sure. That's what I meant. For sure when they see those. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Because for sure when you see their profits like that, somebody's going to come into the space. Like yes, like you said, for sure, it takes six months, 12 months, lead time. That's for sure. This is not an easy thing to do. But somebody will come. Like that is the market. So if they come and steal some of their share, then that gives them less power too. That's just one way of them getting less power. But either way, nobody can be at the top and Bitcoin for very long before for competitors come and start giving them competition. That was my argument for why it'll last at least a year. That's all. And it's you guys are right. It may it may not, you know, they may come off their throne, but they have enough resources to stay for a while. That's all I'm saying. All right, we're still waiting for a number from Blake Anderson, number from one to ten. As a math based security implementation project manager, I think that what we're looking for here is there's certain factors that are going to dictate the speed of rollout. That's the price for the budget that you have and then the stakeholder and things like that. I guess the price goes up, the ability of these things to happen goes down exponentially as the price goes down. People are interested in fixing it. That's where the work is. So actually Roger pushing the price down makes it so that the SegWitworth needs to get done. It actually happens at a faster pace. So I guess kind of money that given all of those motivational factors that you can kind of, you know, extrapolate through that what he's doing is in the direct diametric opposite interest of what he wants to accomplish. So I think that hopefully Roger or anybody that, you know, is on his side or watching this, that's that's what's happening from a project management implementation perspective. So maybe don't do that. And the number is six. Oh, I'm going lower. I'm going with four. I'm closer to Jimmy on this. Well, I want to be more negative, but I'm not sure that I can't let me qualify it to though. I agree that Jimmy being really, really conservative is good because when you're dealing with software development, like 10% is creating new stuff and the 90% is testing and QA and implementation and post support and stuff like that. So conservative numbers in this regard are always good. And we do need more tests. Not not a few of Bitcoin, not a bit like no, absolutely. That is so not true. You're being, have you not seen Bitcoin unlimited development? Yeah, bugs that limited it. There's a reason they're called bugs and limitations because of violating some of those standards. All right, moving on to issue two, right sale, a company which had purchased the intellectual property of Craig Wright, the Australian researcher, it claims to be the inventor of Bitcoin, has been sold. Last year, Reuters claimed that the company plans to file hundreds of patents related to Bitcoin and the blockchain with plans to license these patents. And major financial companies and banks, tone ways, will their patent land grab be successful? No, I think this is insane. I don't know who to help, paid him hundreds of millions of dollars for this. I mean, if he's able to convince more people that he's in possession of a million Bitcoin, if this guy is in possession of a million Bitcoin and has the ability to spend it, the price of Bitcoin would crash immediately because it's another crazy million Bitcoin. It's like John McAfee having control of a million Bitcoin, right? It would be insane. I mean, I also don't think Roger might not have as many Bitcoin as people think he does with the way he's been acting lately, in my opinion. You know, I mean, it's possible that he cracked, you know, Climans key, it's possible that he cracked, you know, Toshikis from back in the day. Look, I do think that Craig Wright was around in the very, very beginning. He was probably around when that block of Bitcoin got mine. So he may know more than, you know, when it comes to the early Bitcoin days, but no one believes he's Satoshi. This is completely crazy. As for the patents themselves, what are you going to implement? I mean, you can go after a dash maybe because they have, you know, a nice fat office and a nice fat leader, the Charlie Lee and his coin base salary. I mean, what the hell are you going to do with it? You're going to try and go after Bitcoin companies. It's fine that everyone is going to be at BTC. Everyone is going to be like a one broker, right? Every company is going to be totally unregulated and totally anonymous. Everybody's going to be like Alfa Bay. If that's the world, libertarians and anarchists want to live and find, but then don't, you know, bitch to me with the million emails. So in this guy's scam, maybe because I handed him money. I'm like, well, what the hell you want me to do about it? Hey, that's all I can say about it. I don't think he's going to get anywhere. There's nobody to sue if you're doing it right. There's nobody to sue, but there's lots of people to license. I'll see America, Wells Fargo, etc. They'll see you in decentralized court to enforce their patents and it's going to be serious business because the internet is serious business. It's amazing how libertarians change their tune when they can use the court systems of their advantage, right? But Tegesness becomes absolute. It's got a Jeffrey Jones. Yeah, I'm not sure why anybody's still listening to this guy. I mean, it's pretty much move the coins or get out, right? It's nobody like Tone said. Nobody believes this guy is really Satoshi. As far as the patents go, it's almost, it's almost, it's already been said, but it's almost going to be impossible to enforce any type of patent on Bitcoin companies. The stuff, nobody owns Bitcoin, the name, nobody owns Bitcoin, the code. So you're not going to be able to patent anything on that. And if you can, there's just no way to enforce it. It's just ridiculous. I think everybody's already spoken. It's just ridiculous. There's no way. Move the coins, bro. Blake Anderson. Yeah. There's people, there's people who've been made fun of an effort group and I'm a classical liberal or libertarian. That's just because we're making fun of libertarians. Doesn't mean that we think that their ideas are untenable. It's got shake it up and have everybody. Have a good time making fun of themselves. But yeah, as far as intellectual property, let's say worst case scenario, if he's like, yeah, I'm going to go patent some stuff for Bitcoin and make money and decentralize court or something crazy like that. But hopefully it's something, at least, kind of like maybe he's going to hold intellectual property patents for something and be like, I'll prevent other people from trolling. That seemed extremely unlikely and extremely altruistic for somebody to go to the time to do that. But who knows? Maybe he's really Satoshi and he's going out and being a superhero, protect them people from IP trolls. That's my thought about it. Maybe that's the truth. I remember the idea at this point is that Satoshi remained quiet for five or six years and then decided to patent everything. Look at me, I'm patenting shit. It doesn't make any sense. And the way that he's trying to patent it is just so wrong as well. I mean, look at Blockstream. Like they're actually doing some actual real defensive patent strategies. Absolutely nothing. Like what Craig Wright is doing. He's also claimed in the article that he has a scaling solution, but we're still waiting to hear it. Jimmy saw him. Yeah, this guy is a scammer, right? He tried to register a fake PGP key as Satoshi. He did a PGP signature that wasn't real. He's been known to scam. And when you do somebody that's going to lie over and over. That one thing from that article that was hilarious is he wants a billion people to do and people transacting on chain. You need to know about how much he knows about Bitcoin. The guy knows nothing. Okay, like he's an idiot. Don't pay attention to him. The software patents are most likely only applicable to the United Kingdom. It's probably not going to be enforceable in the places where it matters. That's the United States, Canada. He's not going to get anywhere with this. He's probably successfully scammed some reporter and reporting this. Who knows if the actual $300 million he claims to have gotten for this company exists. He's probably just trying to drum up additional venture capital or something like that. I would say ignore this guy. He's a scammer. If you were a Bitcoin talk, he would have like a tax scammer in blinking bright lights or something. That's my opinion of this guy. Move the coins, bro. Is it question? Is there real Satoshi? Is he spinning in his grave? Is right doing everything wrong, tone vase? You know what? I think if Satoshi is still around, I think he's probably realizing that you know, you got to let the humans shut out. And if they can't, then his invention wasn't worth all the trouble. So it's he has no reason to come back, get involved in this. He's like, either they're going to figure it out, or they're going to work together and solve this shit. Or society wasn't ready for Bitcoin. Maybe in another 100 years, we'll see. We're never going to get any income back at it. All right, let's go to Jeffrey Jones, maybe a less intergalactic answer about the glorious space alien Satoshi. Is he spinning in his grave? No, no, no, no. He wouldn't have left the project if something like this would have been spinning, it would have made him spin in the grave. You know, this is probably why he left the project. So he wouldn't have to spin in his grave for these types of things. So no, no, and Craig Wright is going nowhere. But he's I was wrong. And yeah, he's scammer, scammer, scammer. So Satoshi did famously leave the project to work on other things. We're only assuming that that was intergalactic travel. Oh, wait, wait, wait. Yeah, I'm going to have to travel. How long? Here's my exit question. How long before ancient aliens talks about how Bitcoin was created by aliens? I would love to see that, especially the show where they watch that show behind them on the green screen. It's got to break Anderson, if your thoughts on right. Obviously, if you can go 200 light years through space, you're going to find, you know, other life everybody knows that. So Tosci did that and he came here, and he's an alien, and he loves us, and he's God, and stuff like that. And now he's dead. And now because of what Craig Wright is doing, he's going to turn into like a rail gun round, which goes shooting through the sun because he's that upset. So if you want Tosci to be that upset, just keep doing what you're doing. Don't do anything, bro. Just let Tosci suffer, and that's, and I guess that's cool. And of course, it is a convenient weekend to talk of Tosci, who as everyone know, Mayor may not have died today. Mayor may not rise in three days. That could just be a coincidence. It's got a Jimmy song from one more thought on Craig Wright. I'll tell you what I'm saying. Last one, one more on Craig Wright. Yeah, so I mean, I don't, I subscribe more to the theory that Tosci was a sentient computer, but you know, that may or may not be true. I don't really care if he's an alien from like 200 light years away. I don't care if he's a sentient computer. I don't care if he's a time traveler that came back to create Bitcoin, so we have some money. I really don't care, right? Whatever he created, it exists now. Wright is a scammer, and he's not Tosci, I think that's all, and he deserves all the score and he's getting that's all. Tosci is a sentient computer who was never seen after he said that he planned to fix all the bugs and windows. Moving on to issue three. Let's see, we got a lot of windows here, which one we're gonna choose. All right, issue three, international Bitcoin. The price of Bitcoin rose more than 8% last week, buoyed by a Japanese law accepting Bitcoin as a legal payment method. The success of the Japanese program has drawn the attention of Russia, who once called for a ban and still calls for an end to pseudonymity, but may adopt the fledgling cryptocurrency irregardless. Jeffrey Jones is Bitcoin adoption ramping up worldwide, is Bitcoin more suited for consumer adoption in Japan and Russia. Well, I guess we're gonna keep having this conversation every time a new country issues something about Bitcoin, but this is the way it is. This is, we talked about it before. Basically, this is the world, having beginning to have a conversation with Bitcoin. So, it's Japan, no, Bitcoin is going to take off all over the place, but it's not going to be because of consumerism. It's not gonna be because of consumer adoption. It's not gonna be because you can now buy your coffee with Bitcoin, right? So, Bitcoin is going to take off for when it's used for what it was meant to be used for, which is censorship, censorship, resistant transactions, and a money outside of the state. So, it's going to slowly, slowly, slowly trickle out, continue to trickle out as economies, more and more economies fail, as more and more economies print their money and their currencies into oblivion, as more and more of the world market crashes piece by piece, people will discover Bitcoin. They will discover it. They will learn about it, and this will force them to even learn more about their own currencies. So, no, but it is nice, of course, to see the world beginning this conversation with Bitcoin and thinking maybe, hey, we can now just use it to buy our coffee, but no, we will find out soon that Bitcoin is much, much more than just the ability to buy coffee. So, we still have to wait and see for global Bitcoin adoption, Blake Anderson. Yeah, global Bitcoin adoption, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's interesting that a lot of people that talk about Bitcoin talk about the United States as a huge driver, and it's not that it's not a driver, but India and China and Japan, I mean, they got some drive enforces over there. And in terms of Russia, I mean, you're not gonna be able to ban something that's so fundamental. And that's, I guess, like, Bitcoin.com, if they wanted to have like a public service announcement, it should be a huge graph of the sovereign debt of various different nations. It'd be like some people say that the value proposition of a decentralized computing currency is dubious, but it looks pretty goddamn clear when we measure up case to case with all the amounts of debt these different countries have. So, I think that if you wanna bring late people into a Bitcoin that we should do that, but don't bring them into some technical argument, bring them into the understanding that we need to have and develop some kind of a safety net for when this shit kicks off, because we have so much debt that there is no other solution so far, yet proposed that I know of, that's going to be able to pick up the pieces and continue to have value transfer around once this stuff blows up, because it's gotten that far out of hand. I think that that's what we should take away from nation states finally, you know, looking at and then adopting to Bitcoin and the nation states like Russia being like, well, we don't wanna be left behind Japan. Let's all do things that are positive and add value. I mean, beast with honey. It's sad that there's so many other ways that Bitcoin.com could have served the public with their announcement other than what they actually announced. Jimmy saw. Yeah, I mean, I think this shows that Bitcoin is an excellent store of value. One thing I will point out is that the Japanese are very into saving, right? Like as is China, Korea, all the East Asian countries. And this is an excellent store of value. I think they're starting to discover that. And that's where we... Really the country is as much as a digital goal, as a way to not have the government be able to take your money away, basically. You get to be your own bank. And as people recognize that governments are perfectly willing to take your money away if they control the monetary supply through inflation and other means, I think it'll become much more popular, especially in hyperinflating countries and whatnot. And that's really where the use case of Bitcoin is really, really shines, right? Like it's much more obvious that this is happening. That club's too popular. No one goes there anymore. Yeah, tone-based. Yeah, that's a great phrase. I think I attributed to Jenssef, but I'm not sure. Yogi Barra, man, that's a Yogi Barra. That's a very good phrase. That was a restaurant, though. All right, so... I mean, we covered the whole Japan angle last time on this show. And yeah, they're allowing it to be used, but to me, it's a non-use case because all of those stores are just immediately converting Bitcoin into dollars. So what are they really doing? Are they, I mean, they're helping Roger Vier, now he can, you know, complain more about all these micro transactions because he can spend his massive amounts of Bitcoin anywhere he walks around, you know, Japan. But for the average person, this doesn't really mean anything at all. The Russia case, more interesting, I thought, mostly because in that article, the finance minister is quoted, and he's like, well, we want to, you know, make Bitcoin legal and give it a regulation because we want to KYC people. And you're like, yeah, I'm not sure you understand how Bitcoin works. Sure, you can do that. You can regulate the institutions. You're right. You will be able to generate some tax revenue from the people that want to put money into it. I mean, it's better than making it illegal outright. But thinking you're going to legalize Bitcoin in order to have a better AML KYC compliance, it just goes to a complete misunderstanding of what Bitcoin is. Instead, what you want to do is you want to lower KYC and AML regulation so that people don't resort to Bitcoin to do their financial transactions. That's how you fight Bitcoin. But my money is in Bitcoin because I don't believe that the governments are ever going to fight Bitcoin in that way. Instead, they're going to double down on the stupid. Like a lot of other people are. All right, tell them, but I want to push back at you on this idea that they're not using Bitcoin. I know a lot of executives who used to print out their email, but at the same time, they were using email and they never went back to snail mail. Couldn't this be a good metaphor for what these businesses are doing? It's a start. It's a start, right? But again, it's like it's like Bitcoin practice, like practice to use a wallet, practice to use or receive your practice to know what a transaction is. I think they're learning a lot about Bitcoin while they may not. They're not the craziest, most ideal use case. They are certainly practicing Bitcoin. Well, I agree with you. And let me flip your example for you, right? Suppose that my archaic boss told me, hey, tone, I finally started using email. So now instead of you walking the paper over to my desk, in addition to that, also please email me, right? So it's a step forward. Anytime you can get them to use the keyboard themselves, it's a step forward. Right, right. So it's a step forward. But at the moment, I'm like, okay, great. You're using email, but now you've doubled my work, right? But I know one day it's going to lead to only email and no paper, right? But for the moment, like my dad, this one happened to my dad, right? But I finally taught my dad internet and taught him internet banking. And he finally started paying his bills on the internet. He was still doing everything double, right? He's still like, I'm like, no, no, no. I don't know. You have to give your checkbook up otherwise if you won't update it so. Exactly, right? So now he's like doing double the work, but he's on the internet. So it's a step forward, but it's nowhere near where you have to be. And it's also not a very good extent for people to jump through all this hoops, only to buy products at the same price. They might be better off somewhere like local Bitcoin. I don't know what's going to happen. But let me also tell you what's going to happen to all these 200,000 businesses, right? Because I own a physical business. I've been on CoinMap forever. We accept Bitcoin. In three years, no one has ever paid in Bitcoin. Really cycle through like eight different batches of employees, right? And imagine the kind of time I would have wasted if I had to educate each of these batches of employees on how to accept the Bitcoin payment that never came. So what's going to happen to 98% of all those businesses is going to be about four months. And then someone is going to come in wanting to pay in Bitcoin and no one is going to know how to accept that payment. Because that's what will happen at my business. And this is what would have happened in my business two years ago. And I just, you know what? I'll deal with this problem when it arises. And to this day, it never arose. And it is worth noting that the guy who actually went to BitCamer in Japan said that they had a special aisle for Bitcoin. So they likely had one employee who works that one registered who was trained rather than deploying on all of their 50 aisles or whatever. And if no one shows up for six months, that an employee will no longer be there. His skills, his knowledge for the future. They'll be useful just like email, be useful in the future. Let's move on to the exit question. In your opinion, what country, besides Russia and Japan, should accept Bitcoin next? Jeffrey Jones. Everybody needs to accept the Bitcoin. I think it's going to take a while before people are versed enough. Just like the internet, we had to go through a generation of people pretty much to figure out what the hell WW meant. And what the hell to figure out that at-sign symbol that everybody keeps talking about. So it's going to take a while. And as far as which country, Bitcoin is global. There is no borders. Bitcoin will make borders go away because they will make them irrelevant. And so I hope that the whole planet gets to use Bitcoin. And I've always wondered why they wanted me to put a double-slash into my colon. Blake Anderson. Bitcoin is a very potent inoculation and medicine for a very specific type of disease. So that being the case, Venezuela needs to start accepting Bitcoin and start getting their people into a way of life that they're not constantly suffering and starving to death and eating pets and stuff because that's a horrifying situation down there. Maybe if Chavez would still, or still live, they would accept Bitcoin. Maybe Jimmy saw them. I object to the assumptions made in that question. A government does not control whether or not you can use Bitcoin. It's entirely something that you can do on your own. And I think pretty much every country that hasn't explicitly banned it or threatened jail time for those that are using it, they're already allowing it and it'll grow on itself. Tones. I'm going to lead us right into the next story. I'm going to say North Korea. And we'll talk about why when I come back to you, Thomas. And then I'll explain during my answer. The correct answer is Switzerland. Switzerland. Time has not run out. You still could be the banking champion of the future. It's not too late. Switzerland, get on board with Bitcoin soon. Moving on to issue four, North Korean hackers. More than 73 Bitcoins, approximately $88,100. It's been stolen by state sponsored hackers from North Korea. It's estimated that they have more than 17,000 hackers aided by 5,000 trainers, which they spread out across the world. They've recently begun using Bitcoin back to ransomware. And this may be one of the only sources of income for the isolated nation. Blake Anderson, given the importance of cybersecurity and the new ability of hackers to get paid for their malware, I ask you, is the existence of Bitcoin destabilizing the balance of power in the world? destabilizing the balance of power in the world, my goodness. It sounds like they have a whole bunch of scriptkitties and then some people that are a little bit more experienced and they're writing out malware and fancy kind of phishing attacks and stuff like that. Try to get Bitcoin back. If North Korea can make $88,000 doing that and tightening up people's security, it's not any good for the people that they've stolen from them and try to wash over like that sucks for them. But $88,000 for North Korea is like enough to prevent a whole bunch of people from starving to death. So hopefully people tighten up their security and they can learn how to do other things that are valuable. But $88,000 is in the hands of North Korea and they're probably going to use it to further subjugate their people. So those people might have done a good job for the day and gotten a pat on the head. But secure your Bitcoin. Don't let North Korea have it because they're not going to do anything with it that you would want to have done with it. Tighten up your security. Your bad security is supporting dictators. That's worth noting that North Korea is one of the only countries that won't leave the light on for you. Because as they fly over at night with satellites and such, it's almost completely dark. Jimmy saw him. Yeah, it's destabilizing to government control of money. I mean, that's certainly true. But you know, sound money has existed for a long time. You know, they used to have, you know, wars where, you know, somebody would threaten to invade and the, you know, country that was about to get invaded would just give trippy payments in gold. Like that's like a completely normal thing. Sound money, what it does is it takes control away from the government. And that's kind of what we're seeing here. And this is one of the unfortunate side effects is that sometimes bad people can take them on you way. And instead of government agents that are doing evil, it's evil people doing evil. I don't know which is worse to be, to be honest. It is economically a little bit more destabilizing to fiat currencies in general. But I don't think that's terribly bad, especially given how, you know, people tend to be fiat. The evil is still evil no matter what anybody says. Cone vase. All right, so this article is a little weird. So they're talking about how North Korea stole $88,000 worth of Bitcoin in the last two years. That's actually not a lot. That's like, you know, that's a good day at the office of BitPay and maybe, you know, a somewhat okay day at the office of BitPhanex. Not to make fun of them, but for how much they get hacked. So you can always email BitPay. Right. One of them. Oh, serious burn, sorry. So, so here's the weird part in this article, right? So it says that last July, like the North Koreans are apparently hacked some bank and demanded a $2.7 million in Bitcoin for ransom. So to me, it sounds like they really need a better negotiator because they were demanding $2.7 million, but somehow they've only made $88,000 in the last two years from this hacking in Bitcoin, right? But I found this to be kind of interesting that North Korea is going after it. Now if North Korea, I mean, I don't believe it, but if they actually become the, wait, hit the wrong button. I hit on mutants that have stopped sharing screen. So if North Korea actually becomes the, you know, crypto lock or capital of the world, and North Korea is sitting on all this Bitcoin, you know that that Bitcoin is going to literally just spread around the whole economy, right? So if enough Bitcoin ends up in North Korea, you might see, and like, you know, two or three more generations, you know, North Korea become, you know, the Singapore of, or the Cheng-Gen of some region, right? So that would be interesting. So to me, if, you know, I mean, China was completely communist. China was even worse than Russia. I mean, Cuba and all these countries are opening up. You know, it's still, you know, China's not perfect. Russia's not perfect. But there's definitely, you know, going on in those countries. Who knows? I mean, we're making fun of North Korea now. But let's say they do hack all this Bitcoin and they do extort all this Bitcoin and their whole population, you know, understands Bitcoin in, you know, in other 50, 60 years, they might be the leaders of innovation. You know, you never know. It's, you never know. I mean, who would have thought 20 years ago that Edward Snowden would be hiding out in Russia to protect himself from freedom of speech, you know, if you said that 20, 25 years ago, you'd be in a mental institution, right? Well, certainly only Nixon could open China. But that's an incredible piece of optimism from tone waves there about the future of North Korea. A country that Trump may remind them what happened to the dinosaurs. We don't want to think that way. Let's go to Jeffrey Jones. Yeah, it is crazy interesting, you know, how Bitcoin can just go anywhere and it does go everywhere, even into the black hole that is North Korea, right? So, you know, it's like tone tone, it's some interesting points there like, man, if Bitcoin could proliferate in that country, that could be some interesting things in a couple years. And, you know, it would, you know, Blake was saying that, you know, they're going to, they will most likely do horrible things, of course, with the Bitcoin. But you know, what over time maybe that Bitcoin will get into the hands of people, the regular people and maybe it'll help. So the torturers, we can make your Bitcoin do horrible things. All right. So North Korea does not have internet access. So I don't, I don't know if it would work. That's true too. Like they have, they have internet access, technically, of course, but it's only in the city and like one place, like right? Like one computer. They have, they might have like a work, like a North Korea network. That doesn't actually connect outside. It's, oh really? It's not really do that. It's very similar to the Joe Rogan bit where he's like, if I left you on a desert island with nothing but a hatchet, how long before you could send me an email? Like there's a lot, there's a huge technological hurdle that like North Korean people have to go over before they could have ubiquitous use of Bitcoin. But I hope that it happens too. That just seems really deep into the what if thing. And they, they're saying the article they're sending the hackers to other countries. They're not necessarily working from home. Yeah. Yeah, there you go. So, yeah. You know, Bitcoin is going to be used in a whole hell of a lot more hacking. Bitcoin is going to be used basically to completely re-gut the internet. I mean, as it is because it is right now, it is completely insecure. It is completely horrible. It is completely taken over and captured by ISPs and governments and three-letter agencies. It has been captured. So Bitcoin is really going to help root out, you know, freaking the internet from the inside and create these new types of decentralized networks that are encrypted by default. You know, you know, your customer laws or anything like that. So, we're going to see a lot more of these hacks. But, you know, North Korea, it's anybody's guess. You know, it might, it might actually get bad before it gets better. I mean, it's a lecture grids might get hacked, you know, water utilities might get hacked like some of the things they had a major warning system in Dallas that was hacked last week, 600 different alarms going off all night. And they're like, we're going to secure it next time. Right. So, it's going to be like Bitcoin is going to, and this is, people are like, oh, we want Bitcoin to be legalized by the government, legalized by the government. Just to wait till like, you know, the White House gets hacked, and Bitcoin is demanded for ransom. We'll see how quickly they're going to want to legalize Bitcoin, right? So, and the name inside the envelope, it's Kellyanne Conway. Kellyanne Conway. So, which is why I'm, which is why I still like tell people, look, be as cautious as you can. I don't even like, this is why I've never ordered from purse because my adra, my legal government address gets flashed along with the fact that I have Bitcoin. You know, I talk all this crap on blogs, but someone still has to prove that I own any Bitcoin. I could have been lying to everyone for three years, right? So, what about the idea of telling that the business is, and maybe even non-profits in hospitals should try to stock up on Bitcoin so that they'll be ready to pay potential ransoms? Yeah, try getting that through your board. You're going to look so good to keep your money going. Bitcoin's $20,000. I told you to buy some of those at the house, and you didn't listen to me. Yeah, you'd have a, it's the fastest way to get your CTO fired, if that's the pitch to your nonprofit board. Stock up on insurance for this. I think that moves well into the exit question, which came first, the exploit or the ability to get paid for the exploit? Is the fault, dear viewers, not in our Bitcoin, but in our shoddy code, Blake Anderson? Yeah, the way that things are coded compared to the way that Bitcoin has coded. I mean, there's a huge difference there, and the legacy systems are not super secure. So what you have here is Satoshi invented something, which was the instantiation of value digitally, which can settle digitally. You don't need to come back out of it. And especially now that we have multiple digital currencies and you can settle and trade against different stuff, we have a situation where it's the new digital Wild West. Now we have actual, literal, sedalable. It is the IOU, it is the value inside of a computer, and people are coming to get it, they're coming to get all of it. And I mean, this is a new security paradigm. When they were talking about things like the White House and stuff being hacked, maybe as far as ransom software goes, but also it's just going to be the methods by which people have any key stored anywhere are going to be tested from every single penetration point and stuff, and it's going to get crazy. And I wrote this kind of lofty article when I left banking security to work in Bitcoin about the new age of digital instantiation of value and what that's going to mean for value propositions, for decentralization for inflation, but also in terms of security. The need for a good security is becoming extremely dear at an exponential rate. And that's something that I think that gets washed over a lot, not a lot of people talk about the extremely rapid onset of hyper-high security requirements unless you go back and are invested in things that help these high insurance-based FDIC overheads and stuff where you're not getting any interest back on your money and stuff. So if you're going to want to take advantage of the amount of deflationary power of these new mediums, knowing security is the thing that helps to insulate you from that risk. So again, it's like the new Wild West. This is very, very, very, materially important stuff for you to learn and for your kids and stuff to learn because otherwise you're not going to be able to vet the safety of investments or your bank or anything. And for banks right now, they've still got the FDIC backing and stuff and that's all good. But there's a lot of debt in that system and systemic failure becomes a more and more real risk every day. So definitely study the safety net that we're building to try to make sure that everything doesn't collapse to billions of people starving. Now again, is that really, really lofty and deep into the what if they? Yeah, but is there any reason that we should neglect the responsibility to build the safety net and I can't think of one? It's also worth noting that the importance of security on Bitcoin, the reason that Segwit was tested for multiple years is so that there would be no zero day vulnerabilities in Bitcoin. If there's a zero day vulnerability in some other software, maybe they could masquerade as you, maybe they can publish your private photos. There's certain types of loss that are compared to losing your value relatively acceptable. But if there's a zero day in Bitcoin, people lose their value perhaps millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars. So moving slowly with this security is the right answer. Things that move faster get hacked, get vulnerabilities in zero days. Jimmy saw him, you have thoughts on this. Well, first of all, the fault isn't with the software or the people doing it are evil. It's their fault, right? The people that are trying to hack or whatever, it's their fault. That said, we could have a lot better security and I think in the future what we're going to have are personal HSMs. And if you don't know what an HSM is, it's a really cool technology. It's tamper proof in the sense that if you try to get into a private key of this device, it just self-destructs. So you can go back it up in a vault or something and then you never lose your private key. And I think that that sort of consumer level thing is in the future and that's going to be sort of standard everywhere. Like, Bing, he's had them and they're like an insane amount of money, like $20,000. The software inside it is like $5,000 a year or something like that. That will come down because it's going to be so much more useful for people to have something that's completely secure that a fee can't get into. Even if you use a microscope and try to get at it, well, it ruins the thing if you try to open the box, right? Like that's the level of security that banks have. Well, if you're your own bank, you're going to need that security for yourself. Like, evil people have existed for now. Like, evil qualities about it, then you and things like that. But as sound comes away from government and into the hands of private people, you're going to have more incidents like this. So you're going to need better security. And I see that as the future. Don't think about it. Tone vase. What was the exact question again? Which came first, the exploit or the ability to get paid for the exploit is the fault not in the Bitcoin, but in the shoddy code. Okay, so the more Bitcoin was that I was looking for, right? I mean, the ability to pay for the exploit obviously came first because the US dollar has been around before the internet was, right? However, a crypto locker software that encrypts your entire computer and then demands a ransom payment have actually been around since 1989. This is the AIDS virus that encrypted your entire computer and demanded that you send, you know, a money order to a PO box in Panama for approximately the same price that they're currently demanding from the. The man this money order and PO box system immediately and map. Right, exactly, right? So these things have been around for a while. But I got this from a presentation by a man named Miko Hypinon who doesn't amazing job presenting. So you might want to Google him as well. I like it's a cyborg corporation. That was the name of the software. So tweeted this out. I actually tweeted this out in reference to the Dow because when the Dow was forming, this was in a coin desk article that basically said they were trying to figure out like who actually owns the Dow. This is before the hack by the way, not after. And it says we're paying for the server domain name and like because no one knew like who actually owned it. And it was also registered to a PO box in Panama. Like because the steal to while and the other guy the CEO, they apparently they didn't actually own the website domain of the Dow. And that's why I tweeted it out saying, oh, this is another one of these PO box in Panama scams from 1989. It was just all of the more reasons how I knew people were going to lose their money. But yeah, these things aren't new. These scams have been around for a while. But I know we're like making fun of it a little bit, but you know what? Like I said earlier, this should is going to get bad. Our internet security is absolutely terrible. And the government keeps demanding these back doors that are making it even worse. And I think they're going to I don't expect the government to take it easy on Bitcoin. I think they're going to I think there's going to be a serious like another drug war coming in. So be careful guys. Know what you're getting into. Very glad we elected Trump. Jeffrey Jones. Yeah, I mean, we just want to echo what everybody's saying. It really is going to get scary, dangerous until we have all of these personal, you know, hardware devices built in by default into our phones and things like that. No, it's going to get really scary. There's nothing really more I can say everybody on the panel. I really did a great job. It's just going to get worse before it gets better. And really do not tell anybody that you own Bitcoin and do not tell anybody how much Bitcoin you have. That's about the best advice we can. All right, Jeffrey Jones. What's your favorite virus or email or exploit? Oh, man. I can tell you that they are now all there's this was released a little while ago, but you can now create your very own virus that allows you to demand Bitcoin via a website. There's a generator now that you can type in the message, type in what your ransom is and type in the Bitcoin address to send it to and click the button and bam, you got yourself very own ransomware. So it's dangerous times people dangerous times. This is incredible progress. When I was in school, we had a program where if we sent a message to a certain port number, it would crash your computer. That was pretty fun. I also like the one where the email says you have to forward it to 10 other people and the email itself is the virus. You see a lot of those where it's like warning you about something and blah, blah, blah. And if you spread the email, you're spreading the virus. So those are some of my favorites. But let's move on to prediction or story of the week. Let's go back to Jimmy song. Are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? Just bringing this on you at the end. Probably didn't get a chance to prepare. You're thinking frantically right now. Is there anything that happened this week that you want to talk about? Jimmy, go ahead. Yeah, I think I think Asik Boost was obviously the big story. And I've written like four or five articles on it at this point. So I think everyone's sick of me talking about it. But I do think it's a very big issue. As far as like, we now know that BitNane is huge, right? And they're going to be around for a long time. And Kora is obviously doing its thing. And this scaling debate, I don't think is going to go away. And I think it's going to last a long time. So hunker down, get into your bunker and just wait, wait this out. Because I really don't see this resolving anytime soon. That's my story for the week. And for our libertarian viewers who actually have bunkers, the missiles have not started to fly. You can stay at your computer. You don't have to go down yet. I'm getting my tone vase. Oh, man. All right. So let me I'll do a more share screen. This is where I usually predict the price of Bitcoin. So so my channel on the daily chart is still very clean. I mean, I don't that green arrow was still intact. If you didn't know that there was a Bitcoin scaling debate, and you were only looking at the price of Bitcoin, this wouldn't be anything problematic. So I'm going to stay with the bullish viewpoint. Now, this is the hourly chart. I tweeted this out earlier. It's looking like a lower and then goes back. It'll be an inverse head and shoulders. If it just like stays here for a bit and comes back to the red line, it will kind of like a cup and handle. Either way, I am looking for once 1250 breaks. There will be some frantic panic buying and a bunch of short covering. Now, here's the interesting part, right? I mean, I do my charts on BitFinex only because back in the day, I kind of started doing them on BitFinex. And the weird thing that I just put together today, and what I noticed at one point today was that the price of Bitcoin on BitFinex was almost $50 higher than the price of Bitcoin on BitStamp. And I thought that was really weird. So I decided to put together a chart over ratio between the price of Bitcoin on BitStamp and BitFinex. So as you can see, they oscillate around one. So this should be amazing arbitrage opportunities that the moment the price changes by only 1%, it almost always goes back there. But anytime the price has moved more than like, 4, 5%, weird things had happened to the Bitcoin market. So back here, back in 2014, when the US government announced that the Bitcoin was $1,000. I wanna say that you're right about the arbitrage opportunity, but just for our viewers, just in case it's anybody that's not really familiar with arbitrage, arbitrage does have a lot of upfront risk in terms of loading up multiple exchanges with cash and Bitcoin if that exchange goes tits up and you have it stocked for arbitrage, that could be huge source of risk. Just wanted to lay that down so nobody gets bit by that. Oh yeah, no. And for everyone that made a lot of money and these giant spikes, there were others that probably got crushed, right? Because that's what would happen because right here, BitStamp gets hacked and right here on the right side, BitFinex gets hacked and then here on this giant spike to the downside, BitFinex flash crashes, but BitStamp doesn't, right? So the price on BitFinex crashes, the price on BitStamp stays the same. That's why this ratio goes down like 13%. So the price of Bitcoin on BitFinex was 13%. And it was a bit lower, 14% lower than it was on BitStamp. Right now it's the opposite. And then you have this spike, which the combination of the Dow hack and Brexit happened within I think 48 hours of each other. So they probably both contributed to this spike. And right now, this may be the Wells Fargo situation where BitFinex is having issues with their cash balances and people are putting their money into Bitcoin, which is maybe moving it out. But if you buy Bitcoin on BitFinex, you move it out. If you sell it somewhere else, you're selling at a much lower price. So this is going to a really weird dynamic that needs to work itself out. But right now we're reaching, you know, Artori, where weird things happen in the life of Bitcoin, whenever the relationship between BitFinex and BitStamp goes above 3% on the price. So I just thought this was interesting. That's why I wanted to put it together. I should probably go ahead and tweet this out. I'm sure that people will find that interesting as well. Excellent. Jeffrey Jones. Good. Let's see. I guess I want to do like three things. I want to do two story or two, yeah, story of the weeks and then one PSA. Okay, let's see. First is congratulations to World Crypto Network for hitting 10,000 subscribers. That is amazing. I think everybody needs to give a quick clap on that. That's awesome. Really, really, really, you know, just wanted to thank all you guys who upload videos and thank Thomas for having this World Crypto Network for us to upload videos to. You know, I don't think it's just an amazing experience to share Bitcoin with you guys. And I'm really glad that we're all here. So with that said, the next thing story of the week would be, I guess, a light coin getting 75% activation on Segway. We have to hold it for two weeks in order for it to fully get in there, but to fully get activated. But it was last I saw signaling at plus 70%. So that's a great news. And then my public service announcement is that, you know, first of all, Bitcoin.com, just for everybody. So now, it's Bitcoin.com is a private company, right? It doesn't represent all of Bitcoin community. Running core is voluntary, okay? Core does not have any authority. Just wanted to get that out there again to make sure that everybody knows because everybody likes to think that core is all this authority and that they pushed everybody around and that's not the truth. It's of course a voluntary group of many people with many different backgrounds. And that's it for me. All right. Blake Anderson, prediction or story of the week. My story of the week is that, I don't know, a lot of people have probably seen me or I'm looking at the live chat right now. But the live chat that helped to digest the live news as it goes forward, I mean, sometimes people get goofy and trollly and stuff like that. It's a good time. It's a great way to contribute. And it's really one of the best ways to learn really, really, really, really cutting edge stuff. I'm not saying it substitutes going back and learning the fundamentals of all this stuff, but I just want to say thanks to everybody that watches the show live especially, people that tweet and reach weed about the show, the people that participate and talk and ask questions and make statements in the chat. Creating content that we can respond to in our chat helps us make a better show. Getting your ideas out there and feeling like you're contributing, like hopefully it gives you a good feeling. I just want to try to encourage everybody be as involved in the community as you possibly can. And let's try to basically, you know, proselytize the rest of the world that a cryptocurrency is cool, whether it's Bitcoin or, you know, your favorite all-coin or whatever. I think that participating in our chats and then participating in other chats, I mean, I would say you know, go into the bar and talk people and stuff, but I think that a lot of people in our community are probably like, you know, playing games or in chat and stuff like that. And talking about Bitcoin and these things and the places that you hang out is really, really important. And so I want to say again, thank you to everybody and keep it up. And if you're, you know, shy, jump in and mix it up. Yep, and also thanks to all the commenters who come in after the chat and leave their comments. Thanks everybody, it gives us a thumbs up or even just subscribe, so maybe tell us their friends on Twitter. 10,000 is a big number. And the next number that we're looking at is one million views. We have around 859,000 views, that's a lot of views, but we'd like to get to one million. So thanks to everyone for joining us. I just wanted to thank the 272 live viewers that stuck with us. And I'm out in Minnesota visiting Blake. I was going to be the only person in the world to say something nice about United, but now they've canceled my return flight. So I'm not happy with them. I hope not to have to escalate any further or describe the horror of my life. Wait, wait, why? Why? Oh, it's a typical situation. I don't want to talk about it right now, but I'm in no reason in discussion with United about it. What's the typical situation? How does it flight? You canceled it. It's typical. It's typical for United. But we're running out of time. And until next time. Bye, bye. Bye.