The Bitcoin Group, the American original. For over the last 10 seconds, the sharpest satosis, the best bitcoins, the hardest cryptocurrency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists, Theo Goodman from Hasse Online. Good evening everyone in the internet world and Bitcoin. Jimmy Song, Bitcoin developer. Good to see everybody. We'll have a great show. Tom Vays from Liberty Life Trail. Hey everyone. It should be a good day. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network. Thanks for giving us a thumbs up and a share and for chatting live. We've got 122 viewers. Thank you so much. Moving on to issue one. Segwit 2X. In a stunning turn of event, new code was released making Segwit 2X compatible with BIP 91. That when activated will reject BIP 141 blocks, thus transforming an 80% agreement into 100%. Leading to Segwit adoption by the network before the August 1st deadline of the UASF. The miners, Doomsday response of UAHF never need to be adopted. Bitcoin piece at last. But still the lingering threat of a two megabyte hard fork. Jimmy Song, do we have peace in our times? We do not have peace. We have a ceasefire at the moment though. What's interesting is Segwit 2X essentially co-opted the BIP 148 movement using the exact same mechanism, except they ask for 80% cooperation from miners. That's basically what BIP 91 is doing. It looks like at this point something like 90% of the blocks seem to be in the New York agreement. That means that those people are all committed to running Segwit 2X as far as that agreement goes. That bodes well for the two megabyte part. The last I heard and the last I saw in the BTC 1 Segwit 2X repository is that the two megabyte hard fork happens exactly three months after Segwit activation. At this point it looks like I did take a look at some of the difficulty retargeting dates and things like that. It looks like Segwit will activate right around September 8th or about 13 days after that September 21st, which would put the actual activation of the two megabyte hard fork as November, September, October, November, December, December 21st, something like that. It'll be around there. Tony, you know I was hoping for Christmas. You know it. Yeah, it might be. The thing is it's normally a 14 day retargeting period, but it's so profitable that their new machines coming on all the time. It ends up being about 13 days. One thing of note as a result of this that everyone might want to realize is that the use seems pretty much that because Segwit 2X is sort of the new client that everyone is going to use. So, you know, I don't think we have to worry about BUIP 0055, which does a hard fork in the middle of October. That doesn't seem to be a concern anymore, but we have ceasefire until this whole thing activates, which will be like November, December, somewhere around there. I'll do a write up on that in my article next week about exactly what you can expect on the dates. And you know, I'll go through the code and have re-reviewed by certain people on things like that. I love a good ceasefire. It's a good time to play soccer. Tones, your thoughts. Oh man, Jimmy, don't mute. Keep it off mute. So once again, like, I got to play the optimist card because Jimmy has taken over the show as the resident pessimist. So I got questions first, and then I'm going to go on. So first question, why would Segwit activate in September? Shouldn't it be activating before August 1st, bit 148? No, no, no. So bit 91 locks in before August 1st. At that point, basically Segwit 2X and UASF bit 148 run the exact same code because it will force every block to signal for Segwit, which is bit 141. But that takes a two week, that takes two weeks to lock in and then another two weeks to activate. So that's, I'm not sure if it'll make it for September 8th, if not, then it'll definitely make it for September 21st. So there's sort of steps that you have to go through. Bit 91 takes about five days from release to lock in to activation. That in turn starts the bit 148 needing to reach 95% in a two week period. It'll be 100%. Obviously. And that's two weeks of that and then another two weeks for everybody to prepare. So it's like 33 to 43 days, I'll told something like that. It might be less depending on what minor, minor signal, right when they get the Segwit 2X software. But yeah, it's the actual Segwit doesn't activate for like a month after everything starts. All right. So let's back up. Let's back up. Okay. So right now 90% of minors are signaling and YA. Yes. To me means shit. Means nothing. Okay. As far as I know, nobody is running and YA. No, no one is running Segwit 2X code. Agreed? Right. Because it's not ready. It's not even a data. Right. Yeah. Right. Now, is BIP 91 runable? What do you mean runable? Someone can someone mine. I like, for example, as of August 1st, people will be mining with BIP 148. Is it possible to mine with BIP 91? Yeah. The idea is that Segwit 2X will have BIP 91, which required. What about BIP 91 standalone? Yeah. You can run it. That's, I mean, it's just Segwit 2X. What you're talking about, the software you're talking about is not, right? It's really not, right? I mean, Segwit 2X uses BIP 91. Is BIP, can someone run BIP 91 and signal Segwit 2X? Are you talking about just sort of like make your own sort of client? I guess that's like built on core with just a BIP 91 patch or something like that. Right. Because here's the thing, right? Like, Segwit 2X has its own code, right? In written by Jeff Garza, God help us all, okay? So if Segwit 2X utilizes BIP 91, how long will it take for someone to offer a BIP 91 option and signaling for whatever they like? Yeah. I mean, you can, I think you would take the patch that James Hillier gave to Segwit 2X and put that on Bitcoin core that wouldn't take very long to do whether or not that would be like tested and working. I don't think it's that embedded into their code base, but, you know, I mean, if you want to be safe, you would want to test that. I'm not sure if that's sort of a viable thing that people are going to necessarily do. But you know, Segwit 2X, you know, if you just activate that with BIP 91, which you're presumably going to do if you're running that software, you know, that's scheduled to come out somewhere around, somewhere around July 21. So that's okay. Well, well, here's my question, right? Because this is what's going to keep me from saying Bitcoin is going to $800 versus Bitcoin is going to $5,000. If you run Segwit 2X in order to lock in Bitcoin and avoid BIP 48, can a miner then go to Core and back to a mining with Core Client, I think 14.3 now and forget that Segwit 2X have happened after Segwit is in. So what they can do is if you don't want to take a risk with Segwit 2X software, you would signal both BIPs, BITs 1 and 4 in your version of every block. And as long as you get block template, does that then you don't have to worry about any software upgrades and you can just run Bitcoin Core as is. Okay. All right, because here is my view. Oh man, by the way, this week, especially today, I've been like, I've been so behind and updating my website that I've been going through these podcasts from April. And I was like, really sending to me talking arguing with you over this stuff. And it's like from April 15th, you're saying that we're not going to have a solution for another year. So, yeah, you were referring this to a price fight. Now look, look, I agree with you. The battle over a two megabyte block is coming. And that battle is going to be brutal. It's going to come in November, December. Okay. We're not going to a two megabyte block. It's not happening. It's not happening. No way. Now what are your concerns? Is there a way to mandate two blocks, not wanting two blocks, right? Is there a way to guarantee two blocks, two megabyte blocks after segwit is in and is irreversible? Well, there's no real way to guarantee it, but something like 90% of mining hash power and a lot of economic notes sign the agreement. So presumably, though, that's irrelevant. That's irrelevant, right? It's irrelevant. Bitcoin is not hard forking. I mean, look, 80% of the mining power, I think. It's more like 90. Yeah, but yeah. I don't know, Tony. I agree with you. I think we're going to have another fight, but I think they're going to have a fight. Guys, it's 90% signaling right now. And it's 90% getting in segwit. I'm very, very thrilled that I'm not, I can relax a little bit and update my website because we're getting segwit and BF148, the user-activated software, is not going to make a big deal, okay? But I don't care what they're signaling. We're not going to a two megabyte block. Not this December, not next December, okay? Maybe the December after, maybe, maybe, okay? So the only thing that I need to worry about, what can those sneaky bastards do that can almost guarantee a hard fork three months after the fact? Well, if you're running the client and more than half of the hash rate is there, then you're going to... Not even more than half. You can have like a small amount of the hash rate and you can still hard fork as long as you have replay and what I got. But you can't... But it's entirely possible. But can't you change the client, can you change the client to a core dev client without any issues of even a software? Yeah, I mean, anyone can change their client at any time and then you'd be on the chain, whatever, a chain of whatever the client is running. And that's totally fine. Well, not... Well, here's the question, right? For example, when, like, let's say six months ago, right, before seg with 2X existed, nobody can just change the client from core to Bitcoin unlimited and not cause some form of a fork whether a harder solve. No, they could... As long as you weren't mining, if you were mining, there's a small risk. But... You gotta be mining. I mean, come on. You gotta be mining, right? Like, here's the thing, right? Let's say 90% of these miners are running seg with 2X. I know that seg with 2X is going to cause a giant bug that's going to be a complete disaster. So I think you're an idiot for even running seg with 2X. I think running BIP... I think you can get the core devs to help you, you know, package BIP 91 in order to make sure that it's bug proof and working. And you can signal for whatever you like. Like I said, on my podcast, you can signal for Jesus Christ to come and save your blockchain. Okay? Now, if they're actually running seg with 2X and we get seg with through seg with 2X, is there any kind of danger to then switching your miners back to Bitcoin core mining code without any issue, any forks, any soft forks smoothly going back to core code? But as long as there's one blockchain, you can switch clients as often as you like. And that's okay. And in fact, you know, there are blocks that have been mined using Bitcoin, for example, and that's totally normal. So you can switch clients and that wouldn't change anything. The people that you're talking about that signed the agreement, if they wanted to, after seg would activate, they can switch to Bitcoin core and nothing would change. Okay. Well, here's my prediction. I know it's a little early in the show. That's exactly what all of them are going to do. I don't know, Tony. They actually signed the New York agreement. The 80% are in line with that. I think that if you're going to break off, they'll break off and they'll be 20% versus 80% and they'll have a hard time defending their network, the smaller chain. And all one is going to mind Bitcoin coin, even if they don't have a signal. We'll see. Theo Goodman, are you with us? Do you have thoughts on the new Segwit 2X? Sure. I'm definitely with you. And Thomas, can you please come again with your question? Recently, Segwit 2X, do we have peace in Bitcoin? Or will there be another war or perhaps a hard fork? There is never peace in Bitcoin. There's never peace in blockchain because blockchain is war. So there is never going to be peace in Bitcoin and there's never going to be peace in Bitcoin. So yeah, it's very interesting what's going on and what you guys discussed. I hope that there comes some agreement, but of course I'm kind of skeptical because it's not all about the technical aspect about however megabit blocks and about this date or that date or whoever. It's more about hey, my personality said this is the change that we should do and that's what I support and that's what my crew supports and your crew supports that and hey, whatever you guys get enough support, we're going to figure out a way to undermine your support and support something else. So I'm very much anticipating that sure as the sooner it gets to a date where it seems that one of these suggestions is going to take over that something someone else proposes something which is fine and actually totally normal. So let's just see what happens and go on. Everyone can, like Jimmy said, you can signal whatever you want. You can signal BIP number, whatever. You can signal BIP pay, whatever you want to signal, you can signal. It doesn't know what's stopping you from signaling whatever you want. But the reality is a lot of this is not 100% about the technical ability to scale. It's about hey, is my scaling solution going to be the one that everybody chooses or is it the other guy's scaling solution that's going to be chosen or the other or the other or the other? And who is okay with that and is someone going to be but hurt if my scaling solution is not the one that is chosen and I don't know, I don't really have any solution to it all. But I'm happy that there is, it seems that there is some kind of progress. I don't know about what was it like September or next year and all this stuff. It's kind of hard to put absolutes on this just like any market. It's kind of difficult to say, yeah, it's going to happen at this date. It's pretty difficult to pin down and oftentimes when you try to pin that down, then it just doesn't happen. I know you got to pin it down to some kind of point, but let's hope that we can come to some kind of agreement that's not just my crew against your crew and let's figure this all out. Nobody, I think there's a lot of things that people agree on after all the shit talking and everything else. So let's just go on and move from there. I think Theo's right, it's a lot of emotions and that we're well beyond game theory and maybe just to save face, the other side has to have this two megabyte hard fork. It doesn't matter if it's technical or not, which builds to our exit question. Regardless of technical problems, will we have a two megabyte hard fork probably in December? Tony Vays. Hell no. Jimmy saw. Well, it's a ceasefire for now and there definitely seems to be more economic nodes, especially hash power and industry support on the two megabyte side. Now things can change between now and then, but at least right now the two megabyte hard fork looks very formidable. I'm going to predict there's at least going to be one chain with two megabyte blocks. Don't know if there will be another chain or if it will all be on one chain, but that seems to be that seems to be pretty likely at this point. Theo Goodman. Binary question. Binary answer. Yes. That's right. Yes, there will be a two megabyte hard fork. Wait, well, well, am I the only one on the show that's saying we're not going to have a two megabyte Bitcoin? Yes, you're the only one that's it. You're not. I just got the only one. Oh no. Hey, we've got a last minute guest, ladies and gentlemen. It's going to happen. You know, we just have to do it. Hey, Gabriel, tell us we're not going to have this. Help me out. Help me out here. Help me out here. I could not resist. I had to join the show to talk about this issue because tone is absolutely correct. There is no game theoretical advantage to going through with any given action depending on signaling. Signing is skinless in the game. There is no skin in the game to signal anything. Everyone signaling, spending their time going to conferences and New York for random agreements with other captains of industry, other supposed stakeholders. The only real stakeholders are holdlers of the Bitcoin. Everybody else is beholden to them. Only the holdlers can really determine the future of Bitcoin. Everyone else is dependent on them living up to or buying into the stories that everybody else tells. That's why there is so much signaling and propaganda, Reddit posts, medium articles and tweets. All of these are without skin in the game. It's one thing to spend a few seconds writing a tweet or it's one thing to spend a thousand bucks and fly to someplace and spend a little on a hotel on a day and a half doing XYZ. It's quite another thing to run software on your mining farm. Right. When the miners met with the exchanges and the other representatives of the large companies in New York City and they signed the New York agreement, did they do more than signaling by meeting in person, signing an agreement, agreeing to goals? I hate to say this, but the UASF movement, which was useful for speeding up Bitcoin scaling, which everyone was frustrated with the pace of has resulted in this. We're going to make a trade off. Okay. You're going to get it too big about hard fork. I believe it's going down on a train. Hey guys, can I? You're talking about second order effects, Thomas. You're not talking about an actual cause and effect situation. We don't have a situation here where everybody is voting. This is not a vote. None of these signaling efforts are votes. New York is not a vote. The answer to your question is yes, it's meaningless on a direct first order level that all of these people went out there. It's Ganda and Game Theory. Every operator, including Barry Silver at that meeting and every operator doing any signaling of any supposed intentions to run code at any given time is playing a part. They're all engaging in propaganda. It's all the worlds of stage, right, Thomas? They're all at their part. They want the two megabyte hard fork. They seem serious about it. We're going to get segwit. No. No, I've any great questions. I want my suggestion. I think that the solution to the scale, so called scaling issue will resolve itself with Pepe cards, of course. You just say, okay, I want to get. So, Pepe and I put my money behind Jimmy. And that's unverified. Undeniable that I put my. Let's get Jimmy. Let's get Jimmy. Let's get Jimmy and we don't want to make a worse like our kinds of technical this and that and so on. It's not about the technical. People want to be able to transact with Bitcoin with less fees. The question is, does the core development team think that Bitcoin should be transacted in lower fees than now? Yes. Or no. It's pretty simple. That is basically the concept. Okay. And then there is the technical of Bip this, Bip that, Bip whatever for all the outsiders out there. Okay. It's not really difficult to understand. Can I just make a comment here? Yeah, sure. Yeah, I agree. You go into the whole coffee, versus gold and so on. That's the basic concept of it. Some people are on both extremes of it. I want to ask Gabriel a question. So you said before that signaling really doesn't mean anything, then why should we trust the NIA signal right now? That what reason do you have to believe that that's going to end up in segway? If they're signaling NIA, they can easily signal Bip 141 instead. If they wanted to just signal for segway only, they're signaling NIA. And you either believe that they're sort of planning to betray the agreement after they get segway activated or they don't mean any either one, right? Like they're signaling NIA. So it's one or the other or they're planning some really clever maneuver where they're just signaling to get segway and then they'll just abandon it or something like that. Like I don't understand this mentality. Can I answer that? Can I answer that? Can I answer that first? I believe the question was directed toward me, Tony. You can go after me. My answer to the question is absolutely they could be faking it. All signaling is without skin in the game. And anybody who signals can go ahead and change their mind and nobody can give them shit. Nobody can shut off their minors. This is all, this is all words. Okay? This is all regabral words. Anybody could go in either direction. Now, of course, this is, I'm not saying that when you signal you're going to do the opposite. I'm just saying that there's no direct correlation and none of us can make any assumptions based on these agreements, especially Thomas who's like, oh, 80% above, no. But if they do signal, if they do follow through and you do get segway, wouldn't that imply that they're going to hold to the other side of the agreement? No. Not at all. Not at all. No, that's just not the case. Not based upon everything. Based upon everything they've said and everything they've done. Okay. Let me let me let me let me let me let me. What they've said, what they've done. No, not just what you feel. Let me get in that question. Okay. So first of all, the user activated software was going to happen. I know Jimmy. I know you never believed it, but I completely believed it. It was happening. It was going to force miners and show them that they're not in charge. Okay. So some people see this move for segway to X as a safe face. Now I will even, I'm not even going to, I'm not even going to, maybe it's not a safe face. Okay. Maybe right now everyone that signed that agreement is intending to go through with two megabit blocks. Right now, even the core devs had interest in going to two megabit blocks back during the Hong Kong agreement. The reality of the situation told them that that's a bad idea. And that's why none of them signed the New York agreement. So what I'm saying is it, even if every single person who signed the agreement and who is signaling right now for the New York agreement, it doesn't mean that come November, that none of that they're going to realize that that's a bad idea. First of all, every economic node that signed that agreement will be in a huge conflict because because before signing the agreement, they have all publicly stated that they will only run the safest code for all their customers. And many of them refused to even run BIP 148 because only two or three core developers signed off on it as opposed to like, you know, the majority of core developers. When it comes, after segwood gets into the system, if not a single core developer, if not a single block stream employee, Chancel Labs, Erichelm Broso, if not a single core developer is in support of segwood 2X, how are the economic nodes going to convince their users that they are running the safest possible code? They will be in a huge conflict and they're going to go back to their original agreement in running the safest possible code, which does not have a two megabyte hard fork. That is why that should end happening. Well, so I mean, I think you guys are assuming that they'll honor one part of the agreement and not the other and that just doesn't seem that likely to me. I mean, these are businesses because these are businesses. Well, because nobody will trust them again, right? Like, these are businesses. Trust them with what? They have a, Jimmy, their businesses have a higher end agreement to run the safest possible Bitcoin code and the safest possible Bitcoin code is programmed by core. Not just the other. I believe in the programming. It's about 80% of the hash rate. If you stick with 80% of the hash rate, you're not going to be written out of the blockchain. If you go with the 20% you are getting the risk. If you're at two pool and you abandon the agreement, you're not going to get supplied by BitNane on their. Guys, guys, the user activated software with less than 1% hash rate was able to get this shit done. Don't tell me that. I don't believe that the user activated software accomplished anything by code. I believe it's more akin to what George Patton did during World War II. They sent him up with a fake army, a bunch of fake troops and fake tanks. They convinced Hitler that the invasion was coming from somewhere else because why wouldn't the Americans, you know, their best general? The UAS. Thomas, that's pretty eloquent of you. I think that what we should do is that whatever BIP number you support, you should post a picture of it on Twitter with the hardest weapon next to it. And then that would show your support for it, I guess, right? Because then that is a kind to what Thomas said as far as, you know, I believe that that's one of the most important parts of the world. It was a bunch of, we're going to go buy miners and we're going to. There were all sorts of, there were all kinds of, there were all kinds of miners on Iceland and then run BIP 5000 Pippe and then that is the two megabyte heart fork that's coming on September 11th, let's say, hey, whatever, whatever. Why? Because I don't know what this other dance is. Why? Because we could signal another significant date. We could signal September 10th. I'm not opposed to an out of them. First, we could significant. We could signal December 25th. We could signal December 24th. Hey, hey, Theo. Okay. See, I'll see you. Hey, Theo. Okay. See, I'll see you. Can I get over it in here? 25th. We December, we do. Why not then? You know, it doesn't, that's our arbitrary numbers. They have zero to do with technical know-how about all that stuff. It doesn't have to do with any of the technical stuff. That's just about, we have to have some kind of psychological cutoff date for the people to signal. So why don't we do it? First of the month, last of the month, Christmas, I don't know, whatever the hell we want to do. Well, that's what a user after it. Where did software go? It was an attempt to move Bitcoin forward. People were tired of the debate. They picked a date, drew a line in the sand. This is all a metaphor that I'm talking about. They didn't have 80% of the hash power. What we have is the question. 80% of the hash power is signed the New York agreement. They've adopted Segwit 2x the first. A bunch of people were at a conference in New York and there were a shit face. Well, you don't think it's going to happen. We're at the conference. The prices high, Ethereum is high, Bitcoin is high. Everyone's fucking drunk. We're going to sign the fucking agreement who gives the fuck. Okay? That's what fucking happened. It wasn't the last summer. The price fucking sold out of the four different environments. It's totally fucking realist. It's not published. Okay. That's what's going on right now. So, if you don't want to agree to mention about Alex, then who did you want to implement it either? It's not that I get activated either. It doesn't matter. It's just about if my crew is going to implement it or your crew is going to implement it. So what is going to be? Is it going to be on something cool? Know how or is it going to be on who got drunk together? That's all the question is right now. That's it. That is the question. I remember the alleged people that got drunk also have 80% of the hash power, millions of dollars in corporations and people to answer to stockholders, et cetera. Let's see if we can fight about the next issue. Let's move on to issue two, Ethereum flash. Thomas. Well, you got to come this year on time if you want to talk about the issues. Issue two, Ethereum flash crash. This Wednesday, a $30 million market sell order for Ethereum was issued on the GDACs exchange. The order caused the price of Ethereum to drop temporarily to 10 cents, wiping out the entire GDACs order book. Traders using stop loss orders may have lost a fortune while those executing limit buy orders may have made millions. GDACs temporarily halted trading, which was quickly restored. Toned Bay's your thoughts. Was it just a fat finger? A conspiracy? Is GDAC somehow responsible? What about Ethereum? No, it wasn't a fat finger. It was just a stupid finger. I don't think it really was all that malicious. Though then again, if you have a bunch of buy orders set up, I mean, if you ran the futures market, look, what happens in crypto is you're dealing with a bunch of amateurs. You deal with a bunch of amateurs. I heard this came from the Genesis block. Now, it's not like Bitcoin's Genesis block, which had 50 Bitcoin in it. The Ethereum Genesis block had 72 million Ethereum in it. So numerous people had hundreds of thousands of Ethereum in those blocks. Vitalik had it, Joe Lubin had it. I can keep naming co-founders. Anthony Diorio had it. Gavin Wood had it, not to mention a lot of the developers that were paid in over the years worth of work before that Genesis block was generated. So a lot of people had tens of thousands of Ethereum in those Genesis blocks. Maybe one guy sold it to someone else, OTC. Who the hell knows? He gave him the password. Maybe one of these guys wanted to cash out. Maybe one of these guys got pissed at the Ethereum because he decided to move to Ethereum Classic. Whatever it was, when you sell a big chunk or maybe one guy just wanted to have some fun, okay? The fault here is with GDACs. You cannot put a market order. You know how big your book is. You know you're running your own exchange. You know how many buy orders are on the book. When a giant sell order comes in as a market order, you've got to have circuit breakers that prevent it from crushing your book. In either direction, by the way, if the same order came in as a buy order, you would have the same freaking problem. It would spike the price all the way up, right? You can let 10% of the order, 20% of the order, whatever it is that keeps it fairly reasonable. Whatever, fairly reasonable, so you drop the price of Ethereum 10%, 15%, 20%, but you can't let it fall 99.9%, right? Because it blew through the order book. That's ridiculous. The fault is clearly with GDACs. Now if they don't want to reverse those trades, I guess that's fine. I personally, I probably, I don't know what I would have done in their situation. I would not have let it come to this. I would have spoken about this problem for years. If I was an advisor on that exchange, I would have had them put fail safes in, or at least have it in their terms of service that they can reverse these trades that were clearly a data error because they should have broken up that trade into market orders and that's it, right? Now, they could have had exception if there was actually a panic in the market, but there wasn't panic in the market. These were normal market conditions and this was just one single seller. The fault is clearly with the exchange GDACs and that's it. What's done is done. It goes to the immaturity of the exchange. It goes to the immaturity of the space and this is what you get with the space. This is another reason why I don't trade it. That's pretty much my only comment on this situation. It didn't affect me. I've never held a theory in my life. I've never had points, Tony. It's especially worth noting that Coinbase wants to have a billion dollar evaluation as a company. Yet we keep having these things go up. The exchange goes down during popular trading times, the lack of circuit breakers or protections on their own market to prevent this from happening. It's just embarrassing when BitPay emailed all that money to that hacker. It just keeps happening. We need to have these basic procedures and I know libertarians are against regulation, but they should run their companies a little better. I'm not sure what's going on there. Jimmy saw your thoughts on this. Well, I think we've all been watching Coinbase and all their property, short circuit, go offline. They've had problems for a while. Something like this is not a surprise at all. Gemini a long time ago had a bunch of busted trades where Bitcoin sold for like 1200 on there when it was like 300. Although I'm sure people like that person that bought that much and accidentally did that is regretting not having those trades reversed. This from what I gathered from doing just a little bit of investigation on it was the market order actually only filled to like 220 dollars. Then there were all these stop loss orders that got triggered as a result of that. Those came in at much, much lower and that's really what happened. It just sounds like they coded it really badly, never really tested it. It's just a horrible back end and Coinbase really needs to own up or something. I hear there's a lot of... To follow up on Tones Point, if you had say $30 million and you knew about these stop loss orders, you could run this market like you wanted to, like a yo-yo. You could run it down and buy it up and run it down and buy emptying the pockets of everyone else and filling your own pockets, which might have happened in this case. We have no way of knowing. There's a lawsuit now that people are trying to organize. I'm going to guess that they're going to end up having to pay out a lot of these guys that where the stop loss was at like 300 and they ended up selling at 10 cents. That's just ridiculous. I would be furious if I was one of their customers. They'll likely pay out those people. They should be reversing those trades. It should have been in their terms of service. The announcement that I've seen is that all trades are final and they're not reversing things, but we'll look for a few days. I saw that too. That's going to bite them in the ass. I'm going to guess that they're just going to make people whole and let the people that bought for 10 cents keep it. They have enough money that they can do that. I did notice that Brian Armstrong wrote a new blog post about having a better backend. They have been, this is a company that I've been watching for a long time. Their big announcement was like moving to react or something. Guys, you need to work on your backend. That's the much more important thing when you're dealing with Bitcoin is not your freaking widgets that are more responsive or something. It is working on your backend and making sure that that stuff is absolutely secure and solid because as an exchange, your biggest risk is losing bitcoins, not about having some nicer widget or whatever. I'm glad that they're at least moving in that direction. Whether or not they fulfill that promise is something that we'll see. I imagine they've lost some customers as a result of this whole thing. I just find that their focus just has been offer for the past year or so. I really hope that they get back on track because we really need better exchanges in the space. Like Tom was saying, crypto is filled with a bunch of amateurs. I'd like to see more professional behavior out of these companies. It's interesting to see this happen on GDACs, a regulated exchange, while other exchanges like BTC-E and Polynex, even Cripsy, never seem to have these problems. Theo Goodman, your thoughts on the Ethereum flash crash and GDACs? Well, I'm so sad. I think I'll go complain to the SEC. I know my Ethereum sessions. They solved it in a sense. Too bad. You're trading on exchange. There is inherent risk, even if the coinbase or what GDACs, whatever you want to call it, exchange works as it says. It just works as it says. There is inherent risk with trading on margin. You can cry all you want. There were thin order books. That's just how it is. Welcome to crypto. When you win, you make, when everyone is on the bullish market and they're making 200% gains. Everyone's like, yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm cutting my job. When everyone makes a loss because GDACs loses their shit, oh no, I hate crypto, bringing the professionals. That's pretty typical for crypto. Nothing new. Moving on to the exit question. Final answer. The $30 million order was purposeful. They intended to do a market order. It was a mistake. They intended to sell less, but added an extra zero or two or three or a mistake in the type of order, meaning that they intended to sell it all, but would have liked a higher price than 10 cents. Tone Vays. I'll take option three. They intended to sell it all. They just terrible execution. One last comment is they don't really need, like, yeah, they need better financial experts helping them with their exchange or how about a, like, even a simple thing. Like the fact that Brian Armstrong has me blocked on Twitter when I've never texted Adam personally and 90% of my tweets are about the Bitcoin price just shows you the stupidity of that organization. Jimmy, Jimmy saw. Yeah, I mean, I think it was on purpose. I'm going to guess it was some sort of inexperience ICO foundation that probably needed some influx of cash or wanted to cash out right now before any sort of crash happen and have some sort of like a cash war chest. I mean, most of these ICOs remember raised only Ethereum and they need some, you know, I mean, they need operating capital to do whatever it is that they're doing. So I'm guessing that was it. And they said it was specifically the Genesis block, right? So it was, oh, okay. It was specifically someone that collected on the 72 million created in 2015 or 16, sorry, whenever Ethereum launched. This is from Coinbase? Well, that's what people said. Like the block of Ethereum that got sold came like when Ethereum started trading, the first like Ethereum sold a token that didn't exist. A year later, they created the Genesis block, but 72 million Ethereum were already spoken for. Right, right, right. I get that, but how do you know that it came from that block though because it's on the exchange? Because that was, that's what that's what people said on the internet. It came from that block to the exchange. Okay. I mean, yeah, I guess that's also possible as just sort of an inexperience person that forgot about that. But it's not confirmed that I remember that there was movement in the Genesis block of Ethereum and there was this crash on GDACs, but honestly, myself, I would have to go back and research about the timing of the transactions. I can't say right now that's very interesting and it's true. It could be a coincidence if it was both $30 million. Maybe we're just assuming it's the same. I mean, hey, aren't we all here because blockchains are blockchains, right? So you should be able to see around that time, you know, the Ethereum was sent that there was a big sell, then you could kind of assume. But I'm not, I mean, I did not know, I did know about the movement of the Genesis block, but I didn't know that it was timed exactly on that sell. So I know what that personally, is that really right? I, that's what I heard. I mean, I don't hold Ethereum. I really couldn't care less. I could be wrong here. It could be any 40 million over Ethereum. I kind of put the two and two together, but it's possible they're completely independent. Okay. Am I next or is there is tomorrow? You're next, Theo. What do you think happened? I don't know, I was just saying, I mean, I think that, I mean, that is it. I mean, actually, that's a crazy theory about the Genesis block. I was thinking about more of a real totally rational theory. It's really simple. Okay. I have an ICO. I raise X amount of value. Let's say we're measuring that in US dollars. And I say, hey, intern or worker or trade manager of the ICO, make sure that we don't go below this amount of US value. Okay. And yeah, and they see the charts and they see that everything is dumping and they just say, okay, we're going to sell most of what we raised in a thing. Ethereum for ICO. And on one side, you could say, okay, that's dumping Ethereum on the other side, you could say, hey, that's really responsible for the investors because they invested in ICO. Ethereum was that nearly possibly who knows an all time high. So they're like, okay, we're on the one hand, we're dumping market. On the other hand, we're securing the value of our investors at all time high. Of course, probably the interns that did that, like turn everyone out, were not really professional traders and didn't just look at the order book and realize when they do a little bit of a market. So as large as they did that it would go that crazy. But let's just say that it was as simple as, I don't know, I'm going to go on a speculation. I have zero proof, okay, everybody. Let's just say I'm an ICO and I said, hey, you're in charge of trading, Mr. X. And Mr. X says, oh yeah, I'm good at trading and so on. And yeah, and everything is dumping and they just say, fuck it, a market selling and on a give a fuck. And that's what happened. I think that's what happened. I don't know. It's all speculation. We're never going to know what happened. You could say it's unprofessional, whatever, it doesn't matter. But I think that the whole ICO bubble or whatever you want to call it is definitely a part of it. And I think that part of it was, hey, on the other hand, hey, the people that bought the ICO are investors and they want to secure this amount of fiat value. I need to secure that, dump it. And so we have to think about that too. So it's like kind of weird. It's like irrational, irrational, stupid, not stupid. I don't know. And I don't know if I even care. But as far as GDAX, I don't know what I have not analyzed their internal mechanisms about their margin trading and I don't know whatever the hell they had. But I guess they were not expecting such a big dump, actually, honestly. And they're like, okay, what do we do now? And actually they were not expecting such a big dump either and they don't know what the fuck to do. I agree. I think they weren't expecting it in Coinbase and GDAX really needs to upgrade their software something like you were selling $30 million. This is X percent of the entire market. Are you sure you want to make this trade? Some kind of little Windows assistant action here to bring up some clippy. But I do agree with the panel. I think it was intended to be a sell. I think they wanted to move their Ethereum. I think they learned very quickly what a market order can do when you sell $30 million of worth. I don't think any of us have ever been close to that. But you have to imagine they weren't expecting to be selling in ten cents. Let's move on to issue three, issue three status and civic yet another week and two more multi-million dollar ICOs. This time completely breaking the Ethereum network and forcing most exchanges to halt transactions completely. However, the sales themselves were massive successes with status raising $66 million and civic raising $33 million for their decentralized messaging and decentralized identity applications respectively. Theo Goodman, your thoughts on the new ICOs and the trading halt? About ICO status and civic. Honestly, I have not had enough time to really analyze status. I do know that a lot of people are very interested in it. No one has. No one had the time to analyze it. Everyone just heard of it like three weeks ago. Exactly. So the people that heard about it three weeks ago, let's just take the example, the people that heard about it three weeks ago or even two weeks ago and maybe even one week ago, they're totally thrilled what I've heard. They're totally thrilled with it. They think it's great and it's like a Bitcoin killer and Ethereum killer even though it's a token on Ethereum. I don't know what else. It doesn't matter. I'll tell you what, it doesn't matter. In the same thing with the civic thing, it doesn't matter. It's just a matter of here is blockchain Bitcoin altcoins. It was in 2013, 2014 altcoins. Now it's blockchain and ER20 tokens or wave tokens or counterparty tokens or whatever the hell you want to do. It doesn't matter. People will speculate on it. So I cannot honestly say anything about the status, status, whatever the hell it's called, this thing. I know a lot of people are interested in it. Great for you. Hey, it'll probably have its pump. Who knows? I have no clue. It'll probably have its pump. I don't know what you're doing. However, in this market, maybe it has its pump. Who knows? The same thing with the civic thing. But the thing with the civic thing, I will take a little bit. I have something to say with the civic thing because Vinny, it's like, okay, so on world crypto network, we are on world crypto network and we have for a long time. I think that we did our best to not, I would say, okay, hey, I talked about Pepe Cash and all that shit. It's okay. But I think generally speaking, we didn't pump shit, okay? And we didn't pump our own projects in a crazy way like that was extraordinary or stupid. And even if someone said Pepe Cash is stupid or your Theo, your full of shit, all your Pepe cards are stupid, I would be here to answer to it. But Vinny, for your civic offering, I don't think you would be ready to do it. I'd be happy if Vinny, if you were happy to come on world crypto network and say, hey, Theo, Tony or Jimmy or Thomas and whoever else, let's talk about your civic part because the reason is, is because we've talked about that on the world crypto network. We've talked about identity. We've talked about passports, blockchain passports. We've talked about what that whole shit is you're doing in your ICO actually. All you're doing is you're repackaging it and you're doing it in an ICO and you know what? What's even more funny? You were like sell Bitcoin under a thousand and now you're talking about ICO. So I don't know. Do what you want. I don't care. Vinny, do what you want. But Vinny is my invitation. I'm very happy to have you on discussion on world crypto network. If you want, I have a feeling you're not going to take it, but it doesn't matter. You can pick your host, Thomas, Tony. I don't care anyone for world crypto network. And that's fine. So that's my opinion about what's going on in those two ICOs and I don't know if anyone has anything to add to it. It doesn't matter. New bit of gizmo. Very interesting project. And certainly we talked about blockchain ID here on the world crypto network. Chris Ellis's project like Theo is noting, sadly, we never had $33 million to spend on any of our ideas. Tones, your thoughts on the new ICOs? I mean, I don't have any thoughts on the ICO project specifically, mostly because I've never heard of stratus or what it does. Sadly, it's status. There's another altcoin called stratus. I don't know what they do, but there are two of them. So confusion away. So that one is totally irrelevant. I think it's people are going to realize it's, you know, they just threw money away. I mean, the Civic one comes with Vinny linkham's name on it. So it has a little more weight. Do I think it's, you know, do I like the ICO route that Vinny has done? No, of course not. Right? Maybe if I, I mean, I got to know Vinny a little bit. Maybe if I didn't do that, I feel way more comfortable, you know, fully calling him out. Probably why I don't want to meet any more people in the crypto space. I should just stay in my own little bubble. So I can like continue to be fully critical of people and projects. But it's also irrelevant to me. What I do find relevant is that the non-developer have been saying for over a year that the Ethereum blockchain can't scale and it's going to exponentially grow faster than Bitcoin and it's going to become totally unstable and totally unusable and it's stupid to even attempt to scale that stupidity. And it was nice to see the seeds of that stupidity come to fruition of something I've been talking about for a year. For me, the, look, all of these ICOs, they're clearly in a tool of style bubble because they're all, it's like people just discovering internet for the first time, right? I'll big the bubble will get, but I'm not going to participate. I can guarantee you that. I'm just going to hold on to my Bitcoin. But the reality that the Ethereum blockchain is completely unstable and that it can't handle this and with each like as the affinity part of the scam like as a bigger and bigger name starts to ICO. And right now what I'm seeing the shit companies looking at this and saying, hey, how can we ICO we want that money? We actually have a product. We actually have a legit business. How can we take advantage of this and and if it's got for bit, I feel like, look, what was it? What was the name of that straddle? What was it again? Status status. Okay. Thank you. So look, I don't feel bad for status. I don't feel I mean, everyone in that company is probably a scammer. I don't feel bad if something happens like if their company goes under. I don't feel bad if every one of their investors loses every dime and goes into debt for being stupid. I don't care for them, right? But if there's a legit company creating having that has a real business that has real revenue coming in or maybe they have some debt, but they have a product that's actually helping people. Now, not in theory in five years, right? But now and that company decides to go the ICO route because they can make some money and do some good and they build it on a theorem and then a theorem implodes and that implodes their company. That would kind of feel bad for. So I think this is setting an absolute terrible precedent and as legit companies start to buy into this bullshit, they will put even more pressure on this unstable achievement. And then there's a lot of Ethereum blockchain that is not going to survive. It's like forget my regulatory complaints about it. Forget, you know, forget all that technologically and I'm not even a developer. I mean, you don't need to be a developer to realize that that blockchain growth is unsustainable and bringing this all the way back to our first topic. This is the reason why Bitcoin will not go to a two megabyte block unless it is absolutely necessary and every core developer is on board with it. And right now, not a single one of them is that that is a 95% consensus you need to get on a larger block. And the secret to exproposal, I've also heard is an eight megabyte hard for. They're going to like, you know, keep it to two megabytes, but they're not going to want a hard fork at every freaking time. They're going to try to sneak some code that's either eight megabytes or unlimited. And then they're going to go to two and then so that it will be easier to then go to four. That is not happening because Ethereum is going to show us the way. Just like Ethereum, just like Ethereum showed the world why I can tend to this hard fork as a disaster, Ethereum is going to show the world what happens when you have 12 stuck on the blocks that aren't in check and the size of your block changes, you know, goes to the moon and not it'll do the opposite to the price. The next time Ethereum grinds to a halt, it's going to stay that way for like a week. I'm afraid tone that the core developers aren't running, but two things. Jack and shit and Jack left town. And everyone's always critical of the tulips, but the tulips were bred for bright colors and wonderful patterns. And the more expensive tulips were the better colored tulips. It wasn't market. Jimmy Song, your thoughts. Well, I mean, the more I look at ICOs, they look less and less like real businesses, right? I think the internet sort of brought up like a new business model, which was get a lot of people to use it and then we'll figure out the revenue later. Now we're at a point where it's, we'll get the revenue now and we never have to figure out a business model. I don't understand this at all and why money is going into it. Maybe I'm just completely missing something. I will note that status completely slowed down the entire Ethereum network. That was hilarious. For a whole day, people couldn't get any Ethereum transactions in because there was so much backlog from the status ICO. And you know, it's the whole ICO phenomenon is really interesting because both the seller of the ICO thinks that they can make money. They clearly can because they're selling the tokens. And the people that are buying also think they can make money because they can like quickly turn it around at another exchange or something and sell it really quick. So of course, demand is going to go shoot up until they're not enough greater fools. At that point, it'll start crashing. But that might be a lot of time away. I'll also note that Iman Guntzirer completely crushed the bank or ICO. And people here know who Iman is and how critical he's been a Bitcoin in various things and how much he's likely Ethereum. The fact that he absolutely crushed it and just destroyed bank or and said it's completely insecure and that tells me all I need to know about the entire basis upon which bank core was created. I mean, the fact that the entire network slowed and things like that, I think Civic did a little bit of a better job. They gave people numbers in line and you can basically do it. I'm guessing that's going to be a new model of ICOs where they don't necessarily completely clogged the network. But I don't know. It just seems like such a bubble right now and I can't see this ending well. You're going to get some governmental scrutiny at some point with this much monetary loss. So yeah, I don't know. I'm not very happy about how it's going but that's just the way it is. Nobody really cares what I think. The key to avoiding regulation is not to create any losers. ICOs create too many losers. There's going to be regulation. And Jimmy's right about the revenues first idea. What if you could open a restaurant, pre-sell 10 years worth of revenues, keep that money. Why bother running the restaurant? You got the money. Moving on to the exit question, how many ICOs before the bubble pops? Will it be financial or regulatory? Theo Goodman. I do not have an exact number about how many ICOs. I think that is... You got to give me exact number. Oh, no. It depends. It's going to be five to ten. You have exact number. Three problem. How about this? Twenty one million ICOs. And as far as the other question, it's very clear. There has to be first massive financial pain. And as far as pain, I mean pain among no others. Then comes the regulatory action. Who's going to complain first? Nobody. You only have complaining to authorities when people lose and they think, oh no, it's not my fault I lost. I need to complain. Then you have complaints. Only then. And not before. It's like other discussions. It's not about the technical. It's about the personality and it's about the feeling. And when you lose, you will complain. And that's what it's about. All right, tone, vase. All right. All right. Well, you missed one. You said is the bubble going to pop because of financial? What were the two choices? It was a regulatory financial or regulatory. But you missed technological. I mean, if Ethereum doesn't work for two weeks or Ethereum just breaks down or Vitalik breaks down himself, he hasn't been looking very healthy these days or possibly ever. I mean, Ethereum also goes and if Ethereum goes, all of these projects are totally screwed. So you have like three reasons for it not to work. How many ICOs? I don't know. They'll be, I'm guessing they'll be another hundred, maybe another 20 that are high profile, maybe another hundred overall. But not to mention there's new platforms coming out, right? They'll be there. And the latest I see that we're still waiting for three or four Ethereum competitors to come out because they want to take a lot of those ICOs onto their platforms, right? I mean, this bubble is going to get ugly, ugly, ugly, ugly. I'm not touching it, but it's just like, you guys, I actually have to go over my time. I'll briefly say that I am expecting Bitcoin price to go up. I am very bullish on Bitcoin as my prediction. So I'm still looking at 3000. This goes back to our early discussion where I argued with Jimmy that we get segred in and then people are not going to run segred 2x after that. They'll be running core because core is not going to sign off on segred 2x. All right. On that note, I'm going to get going guys enjoy the rest of the show and I'll see you all next week. Thanks so much, Tony. Let's go to Jimmy's song. How many ICOs? I think about three months worth. I'm going to guess that's about 120 or so. Bumbles generally pop when nobody thinks they can make money anymore. And that's going to happen very quickly, like all of a sudden, but we still got some fraught thing to go as is my guess. I mean, it's very clear that both sides are making money. A lot of these coins right after an exchange will list them, will pop even further. So yeah, it just seems like it took a while before during the dot com bubble when there was an IPO that actually went down on the first day. That will happen at some point and that's going to be a very interesting day because everybody else is going to be scared. They called it Facebook. And thanks so much for everyone for giving us a thumbs up and a share. We've got over 600 live viewers. The chat scrolling so fast. I can't even read it. We've got a little bit of time left though. We have one more issue moving on to issue four coin base and cryptocurrency coin base appeal the recent court decision in a class action lawsuit filed by former customers of the cryptocurrency exchange. The customer is alleged that coin base had a fiduciary duty to know their customer and that they should have been more actively involved and reported suspicious transactions. Instead of allegedly allowing cryptocurrency founder Paul Vernon to escape to China with perhaps millions in customer funds. Theo Goodman should coin base be held accountable? Are they at fault? Much like Charlie Schrem for not paying enough attention. I'm not your lawyer. So I can't give lawyers opinion. But it's pretty difficult. The majority of the cryptocurrency transactions on coin base were quotation marks legit. Let's be honest about it. Most of the transactions were legit. Sure. Maybe suddenly there was a large transaction. Honestly, I can't say I don't have information that was suddenly there was suddenly a crazy large transaction. It could be the case. If that were the case, I don't know what coin base policy is as far as yeah, if you're someone that does, let's say that you're a commercial person that uses coin base and you have 1K, 2K, 5K, 10K, 1K, 2K, 5K. And then suddenly you have half a million, 1 million. Do you say, okay, that's weird? I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a K-C-Y person. Do you signal the alarm then? It's kind of difficult to say how much coin, I'm not a lawyer as far as this whole thing. So it's kind of difficult for me to say, I would default to what a lawyer has to say about the whole thing. Of course, coin base, hey, if you're listening, it would be friendly from you to maybe help the people that have issues with cryptocurrency, with the text, with the transactions and so on, maybe they can, if they have some issue with cryptocurrency, but it's kind of difficult to say in my opinion right now what the issue is with coin base. Actually because I'm not a lawyer and I don't have enough information about it. It's funny because I recall at the time we joked that coin base looked at those receipts and they said, wow, cryptocurrency is making so much money on all coin trading. We got to get into that and then they expand. Right, and they got into it. They got into it right? They realized that, hey, like, hey, everybody on World Crypto Network, make sure to subscribe and watch the old videos and like everybody on, of course, this show likes to say, I called it, no, we called it more than one time. They kind of make what happens to coins. And then they found out that the money wasn't even there. Coin base can't make the money. The right thing to do is to say, where is cryptocurrency getting all this money? They're stealing it from their customers. I think point that I want to say is that in 2015 and 2016 without the bubble we have right now is that World Crypto Network already said coin base, you're going to have more shit coins and they do. And there's more coming presumably Jimmy Song, your thoughts on the coin base, cryptocurrency lawsuit. Well, I mean, as far as I could tell, when I use cryptocurrency, they had like a pretty bad backend, just like coin base. So the fact that they're getting a lawsuit is not really that much of a surprise. That's how they did have hundreds of altcoins though. Yeah, more complicated problem than coin base. Well, I mean, that's what I heard was the problem. And they added an altcoin that had like an exploit that stole a bunch of money. Lucky seven coin. It's always the lucky coin. Yeah, I mean, I don't really have that much sympathy for all these like people that are saying you should have watched them closely or whatever. Like exit scams are very common in crypto and these exchanges. This a lesson to everybody watching the show go use your own wallets, right? Like don't keep it. Like a balance is on exchanges thinking that they're yours because they're not. They're sort of deposits somewhere and they don't they have no obligation to pay that back if they go under or something like that. Which is what happened in this case. I don't think this lawsuit is really going anywhere. Coinbase obviously has a lot of money and good lawyers. Paul Vernon, I guess he's in China with a ton of money. Yeah, I mean, like if you're angry at him, just, you know, he probably doesn't know Chinese and he's like having to live somewhere without any friends and is like living a life on the run. I mean, money isn't everything and constantly sort of running away from the law kind of sucks. Which is something that we that's a lesson that we should all sort of think about, right? Like having Bitcoin is great, having being your own bank is great and all that stuff. But to some degree, like it's not everything. And you know, if you do have to sort of go run and like dodge taxes or something like that, but you know, I don't think that's a very good choice for most people. And you know, you got you got to live within the society that you're in. So yeah, yeah, that's that's my thought on the whole cryptocurrency coinbase thing. Moving on to the exit question. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong will be frogged March to jail. Watch like former bit instant CEO Charlie Shrem. Yes or no, Theo Goodman. Thomas Hunt asks a famous, binary question. And Theo Goodman answers. No Jimmy saw. I don't think he gets any jail time at all. In fact, I think Brian Armstrong will close a $1 billion valuation round on his company. And they'll have a nice large war chest to go in for the next couple of years. The answer is no, no jail time for Armstrong, but it doesn't seem fair. Moving on to predictions or a story of the week. Theo Goodman, are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? Of course, I am ready with more than one prediction of the week. And first of all, I've going to have to comment about New York City. That is right. The east coast of the United States of America in New York City. And that is where Bellator is having an event. And Matt Mitrione is facing Fedor. Fedor is probably one of the most infamous MMA fighters in all time. But I think that Matt meet head. I think that he gets some. So my prediction is that Matt beats him. My prediction is that Larkin wins also. And I think that Ryan Bader wins as well. So I've made three predictions on the infamous New York of Bellator MMA event coming right now. I don't know what a bit proposal Fedor or Bader or Larkin supports. I think you have to ask them on Twitter if they care, if they know. We don't know. Maybe they have a really strong opinion. Maybe they're a big blocker, a strong blocker, a weak blocker. We don't know about it. But I have given my clear prediction here on the World Crypto Network. And I appeal to you to subscribe to it. Thank you very much. Theo, is it too early to get your thoughts on the McGregor Mayweather fight? The box. No, no, no. It's not too early. Thank you very much, Thomas. I think that a lot of people have questions about it. And it's a very interesting thing. It's kind of, you know, as if two arts come against each other. I don't really think that McGregor has a big of a chance against Mayweather. Mayweather is maybe the best defensive boxer ever. And hey, McGregor, we got to give him a lot of credit in the MMA realm. But he's fighting in the boxing realm. And that is a totally different rule set in areas. So I've got to say, of course, I don't favor any bet on McGregor. And if I were to bet, I might take a bet on the over nine and a half, over 10 and a half rounds. It's just my, if you're going to ask me off top of my head, you get a pretty good payment on that. And, you know, it's just about is McGregor going to survive that many rounds? The thinking is is that Mayweather is, he is maybe the one of the best defensive boxers ever. So that lends itself to an over. Thank you very much, Thomas. McGregor's got the height and the reach, but Mayweather's a boxer like theo said, he's better at taking the punishment. And I think he's going to go much, much longer. The only way he goes down is if he takes a dive to get more money in the rematch, which is going to make him a lot of money. Jimmy Song, prediction or story of the week, not necessarily about boxing. Yeah, sure. So my story of the week is this teenage millionaire in Bitcoin. Eric Fidman was 12 years old when he first heard about Bitcoin. And he recently turned 18 and he made an agreement with his parents that if he were able to make a million dollars before he turned 18, that they wouldn't make him go to college. He made a million dollars. So he doesn't need to go to college. He's now living in Silicon Valley. He did a recent Reddit AMA that didn't go well at all. People thought he was, he was basically a kid that was giving on solicited financial advice, which he kind of was. Anyway, if I had a million dollars, I'd do the opposite. I'd go to college. What's the point? Oh, I could get all this knowledge. I could become better at what I do. I'm a young kid. I could go to a nice school. I wouldn't have to work while I went to school. Boy, it sounds pretty rough. Yeah, great deal on the parents. Yeah, well, anyway, he probably, apparently has siblings that are super smart and went to college at 16 or something. So I guess they told him not to go. Anyway, I bring up this story because this is sort of a revolution happening. If Bitcoin is to become the new store of value, the new digital goal, then you're going to have flippings of the entire class system, basically, because there are people that were previously very poor that are going to be very rich. And they're going to be very rich people that are now going to be very poor. And this is sort of like a taste of things to come. They're going to be people that really don't deserve to have that much money, that have it. When financial revolutions come, this is sort of what happens. Back in the late 1800s, there were all these oil barons and railroad barons and stuff that came from very poor backgrounds, but made a ton of money on this stuff. Well, we're sort of at that financial nexus point where we're going from one system to another. And it's going to create a bunch of new winners and a bunch of new losers. So something to think about. There are people that are going to be very bitter and jealous and not like you because you own Bitcoin. So think about that as you plan the next 20 years. That's my story, everybody. Also worth noting that we're all still very early to Bitcoin. I say this all the time now, but if every millionaire in the world wanted to have one Bitcoin, there's not enough Bitcoin for them. There's only 21 million. So if you have at least one Bitcoin or maybe even a point one, it's going to be much more valuable in the future because more people are going to want this currency. So just hang on. We got lots of time and there'll be other crazy altcoins and other crazy ICOs. And I don't know what. And maybe we'll all make it on one of the upswing somewhere. But just my story of the week, I wanted to thank everyone for donating, watching and supporting mad bitcoins and the mad bitcoins Patreon account. Thanks to donations. I got a new tripod. You can see it in the background back here. Tripods an interesting thing. I had an old one. It worked fine. It held the camera up technically. But until you get a new one, you never know how nice they are. This one's got everything locked so I can move it around. It keeps the same height. It's got a crank thing so I can film higher and lower than before. These seem like simple things. But when you make a video every day, it can make that video better. So thank you for your support. Thanks for watching the World Crypto Network. We had almost 650 live viewers today. So when you give us a thumbs up and a share, it really does help other people find the show because YouTube favors shows with more likes. So when you're thinking about should I like a show? It's not just, is it the greatest show ever? It's like, is this a good show? Do you want more people to see it? And you give it a like, Theo? Another comment here? Yes, I just wanted to make sure that I get a final comment. And Thomas, thank you very much. I don't want to get too nostalgic oriented because that does happen a lot in the Bitcoin world. But just to make sure, look, if you're if you want to see what World Crypto Network has done, just look at really old videos. And I would just be really straight up honest. Look, I just like with some weird person that called up on Bitcoin talk show. And I don't even know when I did. But it was like Thomas and other people were like, okay, we're doing Bitcoin talk show. We're going to call up and have people and they were like, okay, random people calling up. Okay, you're going to talk. So the hype was so intense in 2014 that people just did that shit. And they did Bitcoin talk show, random people talk. So just look at those old shows and just think about what's going on now. It's a very interesting perspective. It doesn't mean, hey, oh yeah, you did so much. I have to give you money. That's not what I mean. What do you think that? But just as a point of view, think about the amount, the quality actually of the shows we're giving now. And the quality of the show we're giving then. And think about what's going on. It's really crazy. This is really developed into some crazy shit. You know, we're really on some next level stuff. I know it sounds like, oh yeah, we're going, blah, blah, blah. Yeah, no, it's crazy. This is nuts. This is Bitcoin. We're in Bitcoin. crypto is nuts. Everything is crazy. Nothing is rational. It's all irrational. You can think markets are rational. That's fine. But there are irrational enough until your broke. It doesn't matter. Okay. Just take a look at the old videos and you'll find your way. Thank you very much. You're welcome. It was a subscribe. It's funny, Theo, because we've been around so long that we're seeing it all start over again. I was thinking from that Bitcoin's I need to go through and re-report all my old show. Does this not remind you of early 2014 or mid-disk again? I know. It sounds weird. Oh, yeah, your old person. Oh, yeah, your thing is again. No, it's true. It's like that again. Bubbles happen again. It's true. It'll go up. It'll go down. It'll go up. It'll go down. No one is denying that. But it's true. And just take a look at the weird old videos. I've done it myself and I was shocked. I will be honest. I was like, I sound stupid. I sound my own videos and I sound totally stupid. And I think that everybody else that found their own videos in 2014 about Bitcoin will think they sounded stupid too. That's my honest opinion. Thank you very much. It's like an awakening, Theo. It's a worldwide awakening. It happens in phases and it seems like it gets bigger each phase and it feels like the same thing. Like what we went through is what other people are going through. They're like, how quickly can I connect my accounts? How can I get all of my money into this crypto thing? Just because it feels better because it's a stronger and better system. It's something that we understand. If anyone goes back and researches the Federal Reserve, you're not going to like what you find. If you research Bitcoin, you're going to like what you find with the exception of like we're saying we have kind of a rising techno rotti. We have people like Roger Ver who bought early who essentially are going to be barons and robber barons and the leaders of this new world if they hold on to their funds. So we just have to see how it turns out and it's been a great and exciting ride and we're glad. We know you're lying. You're a big robber baron of Bitcoin. What are you doing on here? We know you're lying the whole time. That's the beauty of being me. If I had Bitcoin, I never would have talked about it. So it's pretty clear that I'm broke, but I appreciate your donation. Okay. So everybody check out Thomas's video. Thomas is doing mad Bitcoin videos. Thomas doing his thing. Jimmy is doing his thing. Everybody check out each other subscribe and whatever. I think that I'm not on the chat right now. I'm sure everyone's going nuts with conspiracy theories and you're right. You're wrong and everyone is fucking. I don't know what the hell is going on. I wish I could follow it. I really appreciate everybody. I'm so happy that it's active. We've got what do we have like 500 people watching or still 500. They're holding on. Yeah. Okay. So remember we had like Derek. I don't mean to help. I don't mean to be holding us on to them. We're going to have like Derek and Thomas. We're doing Bitcoin on Wednesday. We had like 20 people. We were like, wow, we have 20 people. It's amazing. You know what I mean? And now it's so many people. So it just shows that if you keep on doing your thing, you know, you will get people that listen to you. If you have some kind of value, if you pay all the people in the chat that are thinking Theo is talking the most massive bullshit. Great. I appreciate you. Make your own YouTube channel. Maybe you'll have the biggest following ever. Anti-theo YouTube channel. I appreciate it. I mean, for me, that means I'm doing something right, but it doesn't matter. Maybe you're thinking, oh, the anti-Thomas or the anti-Jimmy or the anti-tone YouTube. That's the best thing. Then just make your YouTube is not a limited resource. Make your whole subreddit. Make a steam, make a fucking Twitter. Those are all not limited resources. You can all do that. And maybe it catches on. Who knows? Maybe you have a point. That's great. I wish you have a point. You can prove me wrong. I'm so happy if you prove me wrong. Let's say TheoG at Double underscore Twitter. I know it's a fucking weird Twitter. TheoG double underscore. Hey, you're fucking wrong. Here is my rebuttal. Fine. I will read it really honestly. If you have a rap or a techno song that says I'm wrong, I'm more willing to listen to it, of course. But if you have a text, fine. That's cool too. And that's the end of my rant. Thank you very much. Thomas, thank you very much. Shimmie, thank you much, Ton. And thank you very much for everybody on the world, crypto network, and everybody in the chat for listening to my rant now. Thank you very much. Hope. We're out of time. Until next time. Bye. Bye.