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, Blake Anderson, cryptographic economist. Hello the internet, it's been a while. Gabriel D. Vine from Future Rent. Hello and welcome to the Bitcoin Group. I'm so grateful to be here. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network, moving on to issue one. Issue one Bitcoin hits new record high over 5800, a 480% rise in 2017. For those of you who have listened, for those of you who have bought and held, you know why now, we held during the hardest turnaround as it went from 4900 all the way down to 3000. We hold, we huddle, whatever it is, Bitcoin keeps coming back, proving its censorship resistance and proving that the government, the banks and even China cannot turn Bitcoin down. Blake Anderson, what do you think about Bitcoin's most incredible comeback? Well, I mean, imagine my shock. My current told us that the experiment was resolved and then low and behold, math-based scarcity. The experiment isn't resolved. What do you know? We've got fiat-based scarcity. You've got physical-based scarcity. You've got all these different types of scarcity. And this new type of scarcity, math-based or digital storage of value, it's just not dying. It's not going away. And the stuff that it has to compete with don't have the same features that it does. So I think of Bitcoin in terms of competing with the legacy system. It's like running a race. And the legacy mediums of value and stuff have certain features. They're like ground mammals. And then Bitcoin is like the great condor. What do you think is going to win the race across a lot of patches and stuff like that? There's just plain different features to Bitcoin that makes it different than the other types of mediums of value. It's more inelastic than gold, which is really interesting to say because the inelastic supply relative to gold is an amazing feature. So something being more inelastic than something that you have to go and physically mine out of the ground with danger and stuff. I mean, there's some really amazing features to Bitcoin. And I just assume it's going to continue to go up into the right and not back into the left into the JFK section, if you will. But I think that anybody that thinks that the ephemeral short-term horizons are best to invest in, I think that, you know, extend your horizons, hold Bitcoin long-term. It's a new type of scarcity and you should do well. And while it may be possible that someday they bring an asteroid full of gold back to the earth, destroying the market price of gold, they're never going to find an asteroid full of Bitcoin. I'd just like to ask everyone to give us a thumbs up and a share. That'll help more people find the show. And if it's your first time here, please subscribe down below. Gabriel, divine. Oh, wait a minute. I just got a tweet. They found a giant asteroid full of Bitcoin. Oh, no, no, this is flying. Now, of course, it's mathematically, you know, defined in the code base, which interestingly, I actually recently reread Satoshi Nakamoto's white paper released on Halloween 2008. We're coming up on the ninth anniversary of its release. And this time I actually went into the math and did some research because I was remembering that some researchers in, I believe it was France and Israel, corrected a couple of the mathematical, like sort of conventions that we use in the white paper. And it's just ever so slightly less secure than the math was indicating. It's probably less than a percent or something, but it's like an accurate correction they made. So, interesting process. And so, the thing that was really, one of the things that was really amazing was the supply is not discussed at all in the white paper. That is only something that came out in the code base when you released it in January three months later or two months later. So, pretty interesting that he didn't even bother to mention, oh, I'm going to have this steadily deflating supply, or not steadily, but suddenly deflating supply every few years where it goes down by 50%. And we've gone from this massive inflation rate for the very first few months where nobody was hardly anybody was even looking at it, using it, just working on the code. And very quickly it dropped down to, I believe it was around 15%. And then after the first having it was about eight, something 9%. And now we're in this middle phase where it's somewhere around Western nation inflation rate, monetary inflation rate. That's the issuance as opposed to price inflation. So, one of the interesting things is we're now like sort of a quarter or a third away through this particular issuance phase. And in 2020 we're going to drop well below the issuance of any countries in the world pretty much. And when central banks produce a lot of currency, it cancels out the wealth effect of the economy. And so the wealth that normally would be circulating around in everybody's pockets and give people and societies a bit of breathing room and some means of economic elasticity in the face of challenges, surprises, disasters, losses, etc. It's really been drawn off. And instead we're going the opposite direction. So they're producing all this money enough to create inflation. And that was an intentional thing like our inflation goal. And they say it's because of some ridiculous psychological reason because of nominal prices having to go up, which is complete BS in any developed economy in the last few centuries. And so now we're seeing the result of Bitcoin. Well, I would say that the restricted supply of only 1800 Bitcoins approximately being produced every day currently is a factor in the price. But of course, I think the speculation about that fact continuing is far more of a factor. But this article did actually mention, I was surprised to see that it mentioned some interesting things. The 91% price correlation to Google searches, which is an amazing thing. And Google searches aren't leading indicator. So a lot of traders are using Google search charts to predict Bitcoin rises. And it's got a really strong correlation. So that's a great way to tell whether you, you know, the Bitcoin price is going to go up most likely. I don't believe that Jamie Dimons comments actually had any effect on the price at all. I think it was completely the Asian markets and, you know, the China news where they were like, oh, we're going to ban. But even though I think that was fake news and it was a deliberate leak to try to cool off the market temporarily until the five year communist meetup that they're having. But as far as, you know, I'm concerned, it's just another meetup. It's just, you know, they have more guns. Gabe, did you see the meme that I put out about Jamie Dimon when he said he's not going to talk about Bitcoin anymore? And I said, that's pretty much akin to somebody saying that they're not going to fight anymore after being knocked out cold. Yeah, I'm not going to fight anymore. This is this is fucking boxing stupid. Well, you got knocked out last time. So it's still stupid. Nobody's this nobody from EFG asset management. Who the fuck? Well, anyways, I guess they're, excuse my language. They're, you know, they want to get a traditional finance idiot to come in and say things on the other side of the equation, even though it doesn't make sense. But he says that there's no economic fundamentals, which is completely wrong. Now they say there's no macro economic fundamentals, which is an extremely ambiguous and vague stupid thing to say because the Bitcoin ecosystem or market, as you might call it, is worldwide. So if that isn't macro, I don't know what is just because the market cap is, you know, $9 or 10 digits or whatever, doesn't mean that it's not macro economics. But in any case, it has economic fundamentals. It's just that the market cap differential with fiat currency markets is so big that it's ultra volatile and it's just a huge, you know, price swing city. I think it's funny to when people backpedal into like, well, market cap is what I meant about not being macro enough. Like when you told somebody about the jurisdiction being complete like around the globe, they're all by macro. I meant something else. It's just always fun. I mean, so I meant the entire multiverse when macro cannot be just included to earth. That doesn't get to the state stage is IPFS. We've already got different planets connected together. Bitcoin's got to catch up to that to be macro. I think if we don't have quantum stuff, then, you know, quantum devices with instantaneous communication, we're going to have to have different cryptos in each planet because we won't be able to get around the speed of light. So I have to have Mark coin. Well, anyways, fork dividend. I can agree with that. That, you know, at least some of the upward price pressure, the buying pressure currently around is people want to, you know, get their Bitcoin in their wallet and own the private keys so that they can, you know, sell off their minority forks and get even more Bitcoin. But, you know, commensurately, I think we, there will be a downward, you know, corresponding downward pressure on the price after a set forks, but, you know, whatever. I agree with what Gabriel said about the inflation. No country on earth could afford to do what Bitcoin's about to do in 2020. When the next halving cuts the supply from 12.5 bitcoins to 6.25 bitcoins every 10 minutes, every government on earth needs more money. They need to spend more and more, whereas Bitcoin is willing to take these hits to reduce its quality. It reduces inflation and reduce the supply of Bitcoin on hand, which of course will drive the price up as well. I mean, you look at that is what's going on traditionally. Traditionally, you have the inflationary elements of the, you know, currency making it so that not all boats are rising and attied, but they keep diffusing out the area where that water is being held and nobody gets to go up. It's like a big predatory leech on the top of a cycle system that's taking all the value off of it. Literally the opposite is happening in Bitcoin where it's like, let's continue to condense the value proposition, make that area really, really narrow. So all the ships that are having exposure to that, you know, waterline are going up and it's really, really, really interesting to see the exponential difference between one of those systems pushing the other that already works well. I also want to remind everyone if you want to understand the value of Bitcoin, I would suggest the recent Finnish research paper, or even just reading the coin desk article about the Finnish research paper because what they said is that Bitcoin is a monopoly. And everyone freaks out because monopolies are usually bad, but Bitcoin is a monopoly on the rules. The rules of Bitcoin cannot change. 21 billion units, a certain number produced every 10 minutes, a having structure that's all weighed out in advance. And as Gabriel said, part of the math of the cryptocurrency. So Bitcoin just enforces these rules, creating a system that has a consistent downward pressure on the supply, which will presumably cause an upward pressure on the price. I'm not sure if I agree that that could be even described as a monopoly because it's so voluntary on all sides, the nodes totally choose to run it. So even that is like. But these are the rules of Bitcoin. Like one of the things with this hard fork is the hard fork is changing the rules. So they're on a different coin. The coin that we're on Bitcoin has these fixed rules and not very much can be done about it. I would say a lot of people are clamoring and wanting Bitcoin to be a currency. Be patient. Give us a chance first. I think that we're going to be a store of value first. We're going to suck in all of the world's value. I've predicted Bitcoin will reach infinity. That's the highest number available. That's the highest no number. And that does mean all of the world's value. Once Bitcoin has reached near infinity, because of course, infinity is unreachable. However, it's still the top. I do have the highest prediction for Bitcoin. Once it's reached near infinity, what we'll see is that the credit system, the cash system, if it still exists at that point, will start to break down. When these systems break down, Bitcoin as a currency will offer advantages against these systems. As it is right now, at least in the United States, other developed countries, the cash system works fine, the credit card system works fine. As long as they work fine, we're not going to be able to compete with them. Once they break and fail, Bitcoin as a currency, lightning network as a currency, both of which will be more than tested and ready by that point. We'll be ready to compete at that point. We will become a currency. I love this talk about monopoly because I can see it from both of your perspective of Gabe saying, no, I don't think it's a monopoly. And then you saying, well, it's got so much control. I think there's different sources of monopoly, regulatory capture and government and stuff like that. That's a traditional kind of source of monopoly that a lot of people recognize. But Bitcoin has a legitimate monopoly by virtue of the fact that its features cannot be competed with out of the gate in another system right away. So it has a quote unquote, like earned monopoly on the fact that its chain works in a certain way. It is all but impossible to clone and have operational on another chain right away. The difficulty starts to swing out of line like that bridge that's in the earthquake that you can see once it starts to swing, the protocol of B cash is almost starting to do something like that. It's very interesting to talk about the word monopoly, to talk about the features of Bitcoin and then to try to mediate. OK, here's a monopoly by decree. Here's a justly earned monopoly where people cannot compete for whatever reason. And I think there's a lot to explore there. And it's also worth noting, well, I'm in Austria, the home of the Habsburgs. Maybe we could call it the divine right of Bitcoin. It didn't work for the kings, but it'll work for Bitcoin. Let's move on to the exit question. Pretty simple. The price of Bitcoin this time next week. Higher or lower, Blake Anderson? I never know, affirmally, but those long horizons you're going to do well. So I'm going to say trending towards higher always. Gabriel, divine. What was the time frame there? Next week. Well, it's currently crashing. Over the past 20 minutes or so, we've gone down a solid 5%. The market usually reacts well to us doing shows. So I think we could make that back. Yeah, real interesting. A week from now, over 20th, 2017, I'm going to say, well, the price right now is exactly 5,500, so higher. And I will stick with higher, I usually say higher. I'm pretty bullish about Bitcoin. Moving on to issue two, global regulators play Bitcoin whack-a-mole as demand explodes. Both China and Russia have threatened to regulate Bitcoin, but neither seem to know how, because Bitcoin evades government control as a central feature. They claim they can regulate it, but really all they can regulate is the connection between Bitcoin and Fiat. Gabriel, divine. Do you believe that government regulators will be successful in regulating Bitcoin? Okay. Successful is a spectrum. So I will say that governments will have a little bit of effect on certain limited parts of their populace for a limited time. As you pointed out, Bitcoin, even without Bitcoin, actually, Bitcoin itself is a major threat to money systems around the world, the central banking currency systems. And what these central banks do is they lend the currency to governments to spend at their will. And they earn interest on those in the form of bonds. So basically, these are banking cabals with the central office that does the negotiating with governments. Even without Bitcoin, we might have a situation where we're heading directly toward a monetary collapse. But with Bitcoin in my opinion, I think hyper-baconization is inevitable at this point. Maybe it wasn't five years ago, but by now, I think Bitcoin is actually the canary, and it's not a canary to call on. Bitcoin is maybe the central policy. Oh, no, Bitcoin is dead. We're headed for trouble as the canary to call on. Right. Bitcoin is a sign of bad things for everything outside of Bitcoin. But I would say it's like the secret ballista of the outnumbered army where they have a much superior weaponry. And what that means is governments won't be able to pay their employees. And their money goes away. They will only be able to pay the people who stick around and accept their worthless paper. And at a certain point, that amount of people will get very small. And you won't be able to do these regulations. So there's a limited time where they'll be able to enforce them. Of course, by definition, countries have a limited jurisdiction. And then there's just cyber security and cryptography, which helps individuals worldwide evade coercive legal and regulatory actions. So they're going to have a little bit of effect, and then they're going to have less, and then they'll have none. And they know this, and that was actually referenced in this article. The Russian central bank is not in any, they're not in any, you know, how do I want to say? They're not under any illusions about Bitcoin's capability to evade their coercive practices. And so they're just kind of biding their time and trying to push the avalanche away with two hands. And it might, you know, delay it up to six or seven microseconds, but it's not anything they can stop. So I think what we're going to see, and Russia is not included in the SDR. So they actually, unlike Christine Lagarde over at the IMF, Russia has absolutely no incentive to say that Bitcoin is terrible, but the technology behind it is great. Or even as Lagarde said, oh, Bitcoin's cool. It's got a future so that they can pave the way for their shit coin, which is going to be based in the SDR. Russia is not involved in that scheme. So they don't have any incentive to say blockchain and Bitcoin are actually pretty good, I guess, but we can do better. They're just like, don't buy this stuff. Our population is in danger. You're much better with our infinitely inflating, worthless rubles. So yeah. Excellent points, Gabriel. And I'd also say that the Russian central banker and the Chinese regulators both said some form of Bitcoin may take away the government's monopoly over currency creation, which is a huge sign that they understand what's going on. They don't know what to do and they don't like the direction it's heading. Mike Anderson. Well, I mean, it's kind of funny to a lot of OGs to hear people talking about this, to like, it may take away our ability to do this and that. It's like, make no mistake about it. We invented a technological instantiation of weaponized agarism. That's what Bitcoin is. And that's why people that try to compete with it without knowing that fall flat on their face as hard as you would could ever expect because they don't understand this is a system of anti-fragile weaponized agarism. And that's not easy to regulate. Like Thomas was saying, you can regulate it on the borders of where there's taxable events and transactions going on. I mean, a little, but trying to go in and actually regulate the protocol is not possible. You have to have a whole bunch of people forging those keys and then testing them to try to modify the blockchain, the mining process. The only way that you get to make decisions about blockchain technology is if you want to regulate it through actually having root access to change the protocol and like, that's not happening. That's just not happening. So it's interesting to see how these governments try to handle Bitcoin. I think that we've seen China trying to manipulate the price through announcements and then trying to rake in and by trading against their own news, but eventually China saw diminishing returns and their ability to do that. And then now it almost looks to me like China is nationalizing their operations in terms of Bitcoin. Some people think that maybe China is doing that because China and India were racing to the bottom in terms of trying to get as much gold as they could so that if we go back to a gold back currency, China and India wanted to be able to compete. I think they saw the writing on the wall after a while in terms of there seems to be a new type of scarcity coming about. Bitcoin seems to be the MAC daddy of this new technological email versus mail paradigm money. And so China possibly looked at the New York agreement, saw that a lot of the hash power that might damage their investment was in their jurisdiction and then made sweeping calls to try to change that. And then people like, all right, well, will those machines come out of China and get hooked up in time to be able to split the chain? And I don't know one way or the other. It's a really good question. It's really, really hard to keep track of the amount of chip processing power out there unless you're looking at all the different tape outs of all the different chip that are available and which forges are over ordered or able to actually fulfill orders and stuff. It's a very, very interesting game at this point in terms of who's going to be able to get root control over the anti-fragile system and hopefully nobody and hopefully if they do, it'll be a split which will have replay protection. But the uncertainty makes this entire thing very, very, very interesting because all perfectly known futures that can be virtualized and stuff are basically passed. Only the true future is unknown and Bitcoin is definitely on the bleeding edge of what's going to happen with this true future with this true future. One of those other stuff was available before and people that pretend to have it all figured out be very skeptical. I just want to reiterate what I said in the prompt where the only point where the government can control Bitcoin is when you buy it for a fiat or when you sell it for fiat. That's the only, the on-ramps and the off-ramps are the only place. By now I'm sure everyone's seen the Bitcoin meme. It's quite a classic going around. More fierce and neo. Will I be able to sell my Bitcoin for a million dollars someday and when you're ready neo, you won't need to. What does that mean? At some point you'll just be able to buy things directly in Bitcoin. All of your friends will gladly put out a Bitcoin wallet and buy you breakfast with their fiat. You can get breakfast with your Bitcoin. This is the future. So you're not going to need to cash out large amounts of Bitcoin nor are you going to want to. But in the short term they do control the on and off-ramps and they will likely try to regulate from their position of strength, not from anywhere else because they don't have strength anywhere else. Let's move on to the exit question. Exit question. Will the governments try more Bitcoin regulation in the future or less? Have they run out of steam or are they just getting started? Gabriel, divine. That is a really good question and a very challenging one to answer. It is very clear to me that the current political trend is toward desensualization. We're seeing breakups of multinational groups like the EU. We're seeing breakups of nation states like Spain. And I believe that that trend is going to continue for decades. As such, I think we're going to have wide diversions, continued wide diversions in crypto policy from various nation states. I think we're going to have everything from Barbados and Switzerland and whoever else being very, very encouraging and what we might call liberal toward. And then I think we're going to have continued crackdowns from more authoritarian games like Venezuela or Argentina. So I think we're going to see a combination of the two for only as long as it becomes extremely obvious that a liberal policy brings great wealth to your land. At which point I think everybody is going to start giving up on cracking down. Blake Anderson, more or less government regulation in the future. That's very interesting. I think it's just kind of like what Gabe said in terms of the government is going to be like, how do we get the most value? Do we get the most value by having an open door, easy going policy that allows our citizens to get a lot of this wealth and to be exposed to it? Does our nation state get more with through that or do we get more through being like China and running advertisements on the TV that tell people how to buy Bitcoin, what to do? And then you crash the price with some type of an announcement and then have them gain that way. So we'll see, I think, different nation states handling it differently. But I think it's always going to be how can we get the most value into our jurisdiction? Is it going to be with a decentralized approach, a low regulation or is it going to be with a centralized approach? Let's try to swing the protocol down in value and then have all of our people scoop it up. And I think that's hopefully the diminishing returns on countries doing that is going to add up. But we get so much new money in the space all the time that I'm starting to lean away from that thought process that people are going to wake up and math and start calling it out really quickly. I think in the short term, we're going to see more regulatory attempts. But as each one continues to fail horribly, there's going to be a tipping point, maybe a flipping point where at some point, the countries will start competing to be who can be the most open and accepting to Bitcoin. If Switzerland is the banking capital or perhaps London, we're going to see a competition to be the new Switzerland and to be the Switzerland of Bitcoin. And the governments will continually raise the stakes while lowering the regulation to try to get there as Bitcoin continues to ascend. And I think this merges well into the next question, the next issue. Issue three, Russia turns cold on cryptocurrency. Despite promising about a month ago that he would legalize the market, President Vladimir Putin says that cryptocurrencies are risky and use for crime on the heels of Russia's central bank saying that it would block websites selling Bitcoin and its rivals. While still working on an Ethereum-based token or perhaps a token on the Russia-backed waves platform, Russia seems to be going in all directions on cryptocurrency. Blake Anderson, what will Russia do and will it be successful? Russia seems to be suffering from a mild form of schizophrenia on this topic. They seem to be adopting all positions contemporaneously. Which is a brilliant move, not just in chess. Be all of things to all people. Why not? We're going to try. They're going to be master of the middle way and then eventually somebody's going to have to bring a chain to Vladimir Putin and he's going to have to cut it in half. And then if they prevent the chain from being cut in half, then they'll have earned the right. But if they don't, then the chain will be broken. I don't know. I like Russian people a lot. The Russian government is really hard to understand. They're kind of a national government really kind of fell apart and isn't strong enough to really be able to manage all of their jurisdictional areas. So it's hard to get a clean read out of what's happening in Russia, but with the VPN stuff and with their continual effort to be large and highly interested at every level of commerce and stuff. Not that America is perfect, but like at the same time you definitely don't want to go and go pop your economy and stick you up all the skids instead of using an even keel to make everything slow well. So hopefully Russia doesn't have enough control for its own jurisdiction to do a lot of damage here. But if they do, they definitely might get in their own way quite a bit. Gabriel, divine. Yeah, I agree with Blake that Russia is giving a facade of being a pop of bear, taking care of the large landmass in Central Asia, Eastern Europe. And they aren't really able to live up to that reputation that they once claimed very strongly in the mid-20th century. And reminds me of an excellent blog post that I read this week talking about how blockchain technology would greatly accelerate the decentralization of society in general. And one of the things in that article that I appreciated was specifically calling out 1974 as centralization. And it's really interesting to think about that. 75 was actually the, I've seen various analyses of governments around the world. The most human beings by percentage lived under what was considered at that time a dictatorship. In 1985. You talked about 1984 and 1974. You talked about Nixon and the gold standard of the book. 74, just in general. Not in the United States. World-wide centralization and government power and corporate power peaked in 74, 75. And has been falling ever since. So it makes perfect sense that China has been liberalizing its policy and allowing commerce. Russia went through essentially a coup revolution take over by oligarchs and is not even as powerful of a government as it was back then, which is to the benefit of its citizens in general, even though they're kind of like, you know, as we all are victims, you might say of the state, even though I feel very empowered, I'm not a victim, but you know, we've obviously been wronged here. So there, I think it's exactly right, what you said Blake. They're striking out our all directions at once. You know, I think it's what we expected. They're flailing around because there's nothing you can do against this. You know, they're one tool printing money is exactly what you can't do. So you know, are they going to start burning rupils? I wouldn't be surprised if governments literally start destroying currency electronically and, you know, forgiving debt, just doing anything they can to prevent the coming inflationary wave and make no mistake. It's already begun. Seeing it in food prices, which are always the leading indicator for price inflation. Well, it's interesting too that you're talking about their hammer and their nail solution of like print more money because Bitcoin is literally like the worst thing that you can do is that. So it reminds me of that scene in the Simpsons where they're all in the hole and then they're trying to dig the hole deeper and she put them like, need to get out of here and they keep doing it. He's like, no, dig up stupid and they keep digging the hole even deeper. Yeah, if we dig a hole deeper, then we can pile up the dirt and climb out. So that's kind of where Russia is right now. I definitely agree with the panel here. I think Russia can be the smartest country and I think they can also be the dumbest country, but they can't be both at the same time. They have this strange new alien technology that's going to upset all of their local power structures and one of the things Bootman has been very clear on is that he wants to preserve the local power structures. He wants to be a strong leader of Russia and that's what he believes works in the past and that's what he believes works in the future. And I'm not sure they're going to make it this time. I think the alien technology is going to outlast their attempts to control it and it's going to be uncontrollable as we think. Let's move on to the exit question. Will Russia be successful in their efforts to regulate cryptocurrency? Yes or no? Blake Anderson. It's hard to wrangle that alien technology for the Russians and for anybody. So I don't know how effective it's going to be. It's like a Bitcoin's like the ocean and then you can regulate the ports for people coming in out of your country and stuff like that where the trade actually happens, but trying to go out into the ocean to regulate stuff is not easy and with blockchain is not even possible. They can't even stop pirates on the ocean. There are still pirates even today. Gabriel, Devon. Repeat the exit question please. Will Russia be successful in regulating Bitcoin? Yes or no? Successful. Successful. I don't think any meaning of that word will indicate that they'll be successful. No. Not in any way. Not in any way, not under any meaning. And I agree with the panel. No, they will not be successful. Much like China, Russia will change their mind on this ban and just like Blake says, we just have to have a long enough horizon. We need to wait for it. Moving on to issue four. Zapo, on Segwit 2x. We might not treat the BTC chain as the real Bitcoin. Zapo announced that they will be selling their customers real Bitcoin and exchanging it for the B2x coin. They also said they're going to list the coins differently depending on the longest chain and I just want to be really clear on this. If we're mining the same chain, then it does matter that you have the longest chain. But if we're mining different chains or different coins, it doesn't matter if you have the longest chain. It's an esoteric and random thing like saying. Zapo is only going to mine the Bitcoin whose number ends in zero. It's completely random. So moving on to more B2x. Bitcoin exchange, BitFidex, will be correctly listing Bitcoin as Bitcoin and B2x as B2x. This is the correct way just as with Bcash, you list Bitcoin as Bitcoin and Bcash as Bcash. As Bitcoin connects. Oh, I'm sorry, as Bcash. Everything else is confusing and perhaps deceptive. Both Zapo and Bitcoin.com have both come out and said that they will be listing Bitcoin as B2x. And that's potential fraud. Coinbase has not, they've said they're going to allow their customers access to both forks. Unlike last time where people are still waiting for their Bcash on Coinbase. But Coinbase in a typically creepy and horrible fashion has saved the important announcement of what they will name the forks until closer to the date of the forks. Meaning that Coinbase will likely join Zapo and Bitcoin.com and mislabeling Bitcoin as B2x. This mislabeling could result in clients losing millions of dollars and will no doubt result in lap in the losses. We also have an update today from Adam back in Whale Panda who say that BitMex considers any and all contentious hard fork tokens as altcoins. They will have no support. They will let their customers withdraw B2x and they have 10 times the volume of GDACs and three times the volume of BitFinex. Gabriel D. Vaughn will these companies succeed in their effort to confuse users and consumers about which one is Bitcoin and which one is B2x. The important answer is yes. Confusion is one of those nuisance attacks that is possible to launch against Bitcoin which is very impervious against many things. But certain nuisance attacks like if you want to pay straight up pay money to spam the network, if you want to bribe or coerce developers, threaten blackmail individuals to ruin their reputation and do certain things, these sort of nuisance attacks are possible and they do cause a few individuals to lose money or get confused or miss out on opportunities, things like that. But the great thing that I've really been enjoying, especially with the ZAPO announcement, which is just they're really treading difficult legal ground there. They really might see a lawsuit like you pointed out. Regardless of that, it's great to see the Bitcoin ecosystems, you know, what's the word system? Thank you, immune system. Launch into high gear and just trash ZAPO with memes and tweets and you know, things just moving around so fast. You know, destroying your reputation in this space is really stupid because it's got huge opportunity. I mean, you're anything you do now to ruin your reputation. You're going to have to do 50 times as much. It's like selling your Bitcoin. If you want to buy back the Bitcoin that you sold a year ago, you're going to have to do 10 times as much work because it's worth 10x. And the same thing's true between now and you know, 2020 or 2021, the Bitcoin is going to be worth 100 times as much. There's going to be 100 times as many people involved or 25 or 50 or 1000 and to recover your reputation is going to take that much more work. So it's just wonderful to see that the concepts and ethos of Bitcoin as a social movement and technology have become really more a lot more crystallized. It's the whole UASF thing kind of really got everybody understanding, oh, we have to make sure that not only is it not an individual, you know, responsible for X, Y and Z, but even a small or medium sized cabal can't be in control of this thing or it's done. And then everyone realized, oh yeah, we got to like all, you know, stay on top of this so that there's no takeovers. And that immune system is the white blood cells just watching them swarm now. It's like, boom, immediately you are a threat to our like livelihood screw you. And it's just really backfiring for Zappo and that's great to see. And just to provide some background on Zappo, Zappo started out with Winces, his he's a very successful businessman and likely a very wealthy man and a laptop. And he would store his Bitcoins on the laptop in a vault. So they were very safe then. Some of his wealthy friends wanted to store their Bitcoins on Winces is laptop. So he began storing Bitcoins for many wealthy people. So this is likely a large amount of money, but a low amount of information. These aren't the kind of people that are watching this show or reading coin desk every day. These are the kind of people who just sit and hold because Bitcoins is one of their many investments. So if Zappo really does go through on their plan to sell their customers valuable Bitcoin for a question will be 2X. And it doesn't matter how you name them, the actual art of selling one and buying the other. It could wreck some of their customers who stand to lose perhaps millions or tens of millions of dollars, which were resulting incredibly high powered lawyers going after Zappo. It's almost inconceivable that they would do this clearly illegal deception, clearly fraud of mislabeling these coins and think that they're going to get away with it long-term. Blake Anderson. I think Zappo is great. I think you guys are really confused about what's going on. I'm going to have a kid coming up and biologically speaking. It's like a chain split. So once my kid is born, I'm going to be Blake Jr. and then he's going to have my name because why wouldn't you? It's all the same thing. I think it's funny to go over into other types of studying something like that and say, okay, if we're speaking about this step genetically and you have the genetics that are arranged in this way and you have a name for them, either it's like somebody's name or like C4135, whatever. If you split something off of that, you don't change the name of the original because to do so would be absolutely insane from a data record keeping perspective. There is a minor precedent here, Blake, as Ethereum, the new chain has the old name, whereas Ethereum Classic, the original chain has the classic new name. Definitely, definitely. I think that when precedents that disagree with biology or that disagree with the most accurate organizational keeping theme or stuff like that, then you have to have good reasons like with Ethereum, like, okay, the dial is all messed up and we want to have the chain pristine without that bad thing that happened. But in terms of two X and the splits like that, I mean, I was talking to somebody the other day and they were like, you know, why don't you want two X and I was like, well, we had dynamic block size right now and they were dynamically adjusted to whatever they wanted being it to be. They wouldn't be too mega with segment activated. That just wouldn't happen if we had that system right now. So forcing that situation when it wouldn't happen with a dynamic block size just doesn't feel as scientifically tenable to me. And I think if you try to look over at different types of science and you try to look at what is the most objectively beneficial thing here instead of how can we steal or borrow branding in a way that is, you know, cloned over instead of network effect earned and stuff, you start to really understand where the motivations are coming from. So I think that anybody that wants to change the name of a fork for branding purposes not because of some giant, incontrovertibly objectively negative thing that happened with a huge programming mistake that lost material funds and stuff, I mean, you've got to look at it really carefully and be like, you know, who benefits from this and it's certainly not the users. I mean, if you guys saw the darker pill did a video of he had a tweet that was like, yes or no, tell us about, you know, what do you feel about the two of the, the two of the two X fork? People were like, why did you just make a poll? And it's like, well, polls can be games. And then somebody's like, why did you just make, you know, a KYC poll with coinbase? And it's like, let's just do a poll here on Twitter and people just respond with yes or no. So then he published a video of the question and then no, no, no, no, like all the responses for like, I don't know how many minutes, but it's pretty, it's pretty great to see that the community is not behind this stuff. So then you have to look at, okay, what are these top down people that want to get money from other places? I mean, they, they don't really have the value proposition of what the community is going to grow towards. And I think that's important to note as well. It's also worth noting that on the Ethereum and Ethereum class, it's split that Vitalik personally assured the exchanges that no one would mind the old coin. Just as Roger here personally assured us that Mt. Gox was okay and our money was safe. And we both know how both of those turned out. So let's move on to the exit question, will the corporations be successful in convincing people that B2X is the real Bitcoin? Will they win in the long term? Gabriel, divine. No. No, Blake Anderson. Well, I mean, I guess I was going to talk about this before, but I forgot. In the age of information, like the scarce resources attention, so attacks which are full of bullshit and static and stuff like that are pretty effective right now. People are like, okay, my attention bandwidth is so narrow and all these people are saying all this crazy outlandish shit. So yeah, they'll convince a few people. They'll definitely do damage, but are they going to convince all of us? I don't know. Hopefully there's enough of us, you know, OGs, so to speak. They're going to tell people like, hey, whoa, whoa, whoa, we're in this super long term. Let's not try to shift in the left and right lanes of traffic if I'm really to try to jockey for position. We're going to cause an accident and that's not good for trying to get way down the road to where you're going. And I think it was PT Barnum or perhaps Abraham Lincoln who said, you can fool some of the people all of the time and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. Bob-Bob-Boo-ee Howard Stern rules. So let's move on to predictions or story of the week. Blake Anderson, are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? Yeah, my predictions are, you know, always if people buy and hold, then along the rise and they'll do well. But I guess my story of the week is that I'm glad to be back on the World Crypto Network. Usually I kind of contribute more in the winter time and I'm really busy in the summertime. I got a big ticket-ass sectional over here just the other day. You guys haven't seen the studio yet. Got the Halloween decorations on that. It's pretty sweet. It's pretty legit. This March I'm having another son, Connor, Samuel Anderson. So really, really excited. Nesting as best as I can, trying to get everything ready for the new baby, but I definitely missed the World Crypto Network and talking with all you guys. So glad to be back. That's my story of the week. And certainly congratulations to Blake and Jessica. Gabriel, divine. Yeah, man, congrats. My story of the week begins vastly. Deep of some Thomas is actually in Vienna in Austria right now. So this is in honor of the visit to beautiful Vienna. Deep Bitcoin Group, Das Österreichische Original. Über mehr als die letzten Sehnsekunden, die Schärfsten Satoshi's, die besten Biktcoins, das Tiefste, Klubto, Verungskischpreich. I'd like to welcome myself to say that... Actually, I wanted to make a little report. This is only in the most tangentially related to Bitcoin. My story of the week is actually from the land of Wu-Wu, secrets revealed and what's it called, conspiracy theories. The Blink 182 guitarist dude, I can't remember his name, but... Do you know his name? Tom DeLong or Mark Hoppiz? Who? Tom DeLong or Mark Hoppiz? Tom DeLong is the correct individual. He is very interested in extraterrestrials, UFOs and secret science. And he actually came out yesterday or day before at a press conference full of insiders who just quit their jobs. And so now you see what's happening. We've got Harvey Weinstein over in Hollywood getting wrecked in the media for raping actresses over decades. The brides are running out. This is even before Bitcoin is having much of an effect. I mean, once that takes over and the fiat we're having a complete currency collapses, you're going to see a lot more. But we're seeing the beginning of this now where the brides have run out. And people are just... Yeah, I'm connecting those things up. So... Because I had made the opposite point, I had said that Bitcoin is going to make certain people wealthy enough that problems that were previously too expensive to tackle can get people on board if they're Bitcoin holders. But what you're saying is that people that are still in the legacy economic environment that had gotten along by going along to get along and bribing for a long time, that's going to run out. And it's like, holy shit, that's the different end of the same paradigm. I mean, I think you're totally right. Yeah, that's exactly right. It's like the inverse of what's going to be happening in Bitcoin. All this capability that's just rushing into the space because of the new wealth that people are holding. You know, the exact opposite is happening in the other land. And so, you know, we see that in Hollywood, which is CIA-funded operation takeover since the late 70s. And we see that now in the secret science side, where some insiders are just like, you know what, this is done. Yeah, this is my tinfoil hat as Karl pointed out. That's why I'm the tinfoil conspiracy guy here. I just report from the land of Ugu. So actually, a bunch of insiders came forward with Tom Belong and they're like, hey, we're starting up a school and we're starting up a bunch of businesses based on this recently declassified tech, much of which was actually declassified by President Donald J. Trump. So I just wanted to point out that Delong was, what do you call it, manicured and, you know, in briefed by these insiders as part of a disclosure effort that's been long in the tooth, that's been very intentional by insiders. And there's another side, the real deep, who people say that there's another deeper level of the secret space program that has far more advanced technology. The Navy secret space program, as opposed to this, you know, lower level Air Force secret space program. The Navy one is the one that has time travel and the most hardcore intergalactic stuff, you know, consciousness, whatever. So anyways, this is a great beginning and I just want to say that I'm hoping we get some anti-gravity tech because I really could use a flying carpet. It reminds me of the scene in Silicon Valley where they get big head and like, we need a new invention. We need something today and it's like, you think it and the phone does it and Gavin Bell is like, holy shit, this is amazing. How can we get this to market? And like, within our lifetime, it'll be possible that Gavin gets off his stuff. And while I'm not going to follow Gabriel down the rabbit hole completely, I will say on a separate note, the JFK documents that were sealed in 1990 by Congress are scheduled to come out in 2020 if the Trump administration does not block them. If Gabriel believes he is releasing information, it is possible that these documents will come out. We don't know what they are. We can't really speculate. They likely do point to things people have speculated as a Cuban conspiracy, a mafia conspiracy, or a multi-pronged gigantic conspiracy to get rid of JFK. I don't know what the documents will show, but as a historian, I'm always interested in reading more documents. And there are all kinds of others ready to go. The Tom DeLong have a website called Strange Times, Gabriel. I mean, isn't that where he puts out a lot of this stuff? I'm not sure, but I know that he wrote a novel that was based on all this insider info that he was getting. And also, there are a handful of emails between DeLong and John Podesta that were in the Wiki leaks. Podesta being a longtime government insider and one of these cabal figures who has been planning this low-level disclosure process for many, many years. And it makes you wonder about DeLong being in show business and stuff. It sounds like it was perfectly innocent in Podesta was giving him briefings on this stuff. The only thing I know about Blink 182 is their drummer Travis Barker walked away from a plane crash, is totally covered with tattoo, plays some meme drums. And when I saw them, they lifted up the drum set and he was attached to it and he was kind of flying around with the drum set. It was an incredible, well-planned, of course. It was an incredible demonstration. He's a great drummer. But thanks so much. I don't know if I have a story. Oh, yeah, my story of the week. I'm in Vienna. Woo! I'm having a great time here. I went to some museums. A couple days ago, I walked around today. Thanks to a manual and Chattu for hosting me and hanging out with me here in Vienna. I had a super great time. We're going to have a Bitcoin meetup on Tuesday. We tried to work with the local Bitcoin meetup. But they're very busy. They have some kind of bureaucracy, some kind of voting, some kind of meeting. They're having that's more important than hanging out with me. But we're going to hang out at a bar and maybe they'll join us when they're done voting and doing all their Robert's rules and you speak. And I speak and we'll get out the gaffle. But I'm sure they're great guys and we'll hang out soon. And I just want to thank everybody for watching and giving us a thumbs up and a share. That really helps people find the new show. If you've never watched before, please subscribe down below. We have like 35% of the people that watch our show that don't subscribe. It's always better if you subscribe. And if you have some extra Bitcoin, maybe you made a lot of money this last week. And you're feeling generous. Here's a QR code. You could donate Bitcoin directly to the show. Traveling's not cheap. I'm not going to lie. Cost money. But I could always use your help with some donations. We had a lot of great live streams last week from the hackers congress in Prague. We covered the blockchain hotel conference in Essen and of course the breaking Bitcoin convention in Paris, France. And just thanks to everybody for watching. We had a great time. I'm going to check out the chat later. But until next time. Bye bye.