The Bitcoin Group, the American Original. For over the last 10 seconds, the Sharper's Satoshi's the best bitcoins, the hardest cryptocurrency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists, our Nascar from Stoker.io. Hello guys. And Eve, the crypto raptor. How did Bitcoin peeps? Joshua Shigala from the standard.io to the ground. No, it's the moon. Come on. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network, moving on to issue one. Issue one, Bitcoin and Ethereum prices usually mirror the stock market. Is that changing? Yes, the price of Bitcoin and Ethereum have mirrored the stock market as of late until recently. Many people, believing that Ethereum and Bitcoin are risk assets, fled the market when they got nervous. But now, our piling back in, while other risk assets are not recovering in the same way. Our Nascar, what do you think about Bitcoin being linked to the stock market? Is it over or did it never begin? I think Bitcoin is the biggest stablecoin right now, where Euro is going down, right? You see the, like who calls about volatility? Like look at the volatility of Euro, right? And pound is crazy, right? Bitcoin is only stable currency right now at the moment. So yeah, imagine holding, imagine holding the pound right now. What a nightmare. Pound in your savings accounts. Everything is rotting. It's rotting. It's crazy because if you see, you know, the current market. Every currency is so volatile compared to Bitcoin is, so it's not correlated. It's kind of, it's, it's shining on its own. And the more you bring down with all these kind of restrictions and regulations and trying to, you know, to restrict this self-servant wallets, the more it will be stable and more it will go up. Dan, Eve has Bitcoin broken out? Is it embarrassing the other currencies? I think I might make a great point about Bitcoin as a stable coin, right? That's kind of the, almost not that the end game is that all other currencies are so insignificant. That Bitcoin becomes the one that is the most stable. Like rather than if there is being volatile asset. And, and, you know, there's, you know, there's, there's, it has been slightly less volatile over over the years. I said compared to when it first started out and that sort of smoothing out. And that's possibly because of the fact that the price is just increased, you know, is going up compared to other Fiat currencies. But everyone's been waiting for this great, you know, the great decoupling event. And, and, you know, almost as much as, as, as they get excited for their harvining. So because that's kind of when Bitcoin really makes it, right? When it really truly stands out as an asset that's not linked to any other market, it's completely, you know, even to Fiat currencies. It stands out amongst stocks amongst, you know, pensions, government bonds, everything. Just unlink it from everything and let Bitcoin just do its thing. So, yeah, I'm all for Bitcoin, the stable coin. Joshua Shagala, is this it? Is this the great decoupling or Bitcoin break loose? Yeah, it seems to be, you know, a lot of people, this happens with gold as well. A lot of people say that gold is this exit value, this value that you jump into when, when, you know, inflation hits. But everyone's always concerned when there is a big economic crisis or crash. Why is gold going down? I thought it was meant to be the hedge, no. But actually in a crash or in a, in a disturbance, a market disturbance, cash is king. And everyone gets out of every position because they need to cover all sorts of positions. And in that moment, Bitcoin sucks. But follow the, the thesis of a rare asset, a rare number, where you know exactly how many Bitcoin there will be in a hundred years time, you generally, you don't know that as much with gold, but you know that it's rare and it's hard to get out of the ground. And so after the fact, when everything starts to continue tanking, after the fact is where it continues going up. And, and I think that's where we're seeing it right now. The markets have gone down enough and, and now it's time to, to, for people to jump back into Bitcoin. Things in Bitcoin are getting so good. The media is starting to write articles about what will happen when it's not worth mining Bitcoin. You know, when there's no block reward in 2140, boy, that's going to be a problem. We're going to need to get the boys down in the newsroom on that. And now exit question time for you to predict against the Bitcoin predictor ball, the prognosticator of prognosticators are an ob will the price of Bitcoin be higher or lower this time next week? Bitcoin is always to the moon, right? It, it, it always goes up. But the thing is that you know, the question is, are we seeing as Joshua mentioned, is it a short term objective or it's a long term, right? Long term is definitely, I think there is a price appreciation possibilities in the Bitcoin, but in short term, I think Bitcoin is resilient. This is, I think, very key, right? The Bitcoin resilience is much more resilient than even stock market assets, even, even, even British government bonds, right? So we're in bonds, right? This is, I think, fantastic. Like you're Bitcoin as an asset class is competing with well established governments over and depth instruments. And this is the mind blowing. No gambling advice from Arnov, Dan, Eve, higher or lower? I just, I'm so wrong all the time. I don't even want to say, but I'm going to, I am going to say that I will say anyway, because I think you, I think we are going slightly down. I think we are going slightly down again. I'm still on my negative, my negative Nancy run. Joshua, the pessimism is back with Dan, whether you say higher or lower. Oh, yeah, I mean, I tend to think that it'll be a sideways motion. Now we've seen such catastrophic downwards over the last, you know, since the beginning of the year, that I feel we've kind of hit the precipice of maybe trying to go sideways, trying to edge up, up and sideways. Yeah, I do, I don't know, I wouldn't call the bottom bottom yet. I do feel like if there is another major event, if, if things escalate in Eastern Europe, we could see further collapse as people scramble for cash and look for other places to put things in, usually land or, or just start an other assets. So yeah, we, we, we, right now, as it stands with news with the headlines, I think we're sideways up. The best thing about price movements is just when you think it's over, it goes down another 50%. And now the ball, we're shaking, which could cause a bubble. Will the price of Bitcoin be higher this time next week? Ask again, ask again, the ball doesn't want to answer. That's what it's like when you have an order, you don't, you don't always get the answer you like. Sometimes you get the answer, the oracle wants to give you moving on to issue two. Elon Musk is buying Twitter again. Yes, Elon Musk is buying Twitter. It doesn't seem like he could get out of the old deal and he stuck back in. Also, we've got all of Elon's tweets and texts from the text dump from his trial, Peelebor advising him on what to do with Twitter. Elon was struggling with the troubles of being a boss, preferring to be more of an engineer. Yet now he's taking over Twitter. Dan, Eve, Elon Musk taking over Twitter, good for society, bad for society, good for Twitter, bad for Twitter. It's definitely a very polarized thing. But the political aspect, I think, has got a lot of people, especially after he ruffled a lot of feathers recently with his ideas about how the Ukraine Russia kind of conflict needs to be settled. And that definitely did a lot of feather ruffling. And already some people see him as like some, you know, he gets called far right and all sorts. But you know, I think that there is, you know, there is a bit of evidence that the, you know, the, the right people who are concerned and right the far right, the conservatives do seem to kind of get, you know, de platformed a lot easier than the left does. And, and what I think is quite ironic is that people are going, oh, if, if, if, if Musk buys Twitter, then it could change the course of an election. They're like, yeah, by, by removing all the biggest speakers of certain areas, you probably could do that. Couldn't you, which is what's happened in the recent years, you know, I'm not saying that it did have an effect. But, you know, they're by, by, by stamping certain voices, then you will get, you know, you will get a sway in a public opinion, especially with the platform. So big as, as Twitter, and there's definitely a lot of general, I think hatred for the Elon at the moment anyway, he seems to, he does seem to ruffle feathers on, on all sides there. And I think that he's quite an antagonist. But some of it's quite funny, right? He likes to stoke, he likes to stoke fires and, and obviously he thinks he's a bit of a kind of a bad boy, but a good boy with the sort of the, you know, the, the, the, the, the, the green environment thing, but also saving humanity with these giant rockets, etc. But I like the fact that some of the, the, the, the, the examples of the text and that aren't one of the articles was the controversial idea. And they, one of the controversial ideas, the first one they mentioned is an open source Twitter, but they don't give any reason why that would be controversial. I mean, for us, an open source Twitter sounds amazing, right? It's, it's open source, like everyone supports open source work. And, but then they also criticize the controversial idea, controversial idea of using doge to, to tweet, right? To paint micro amounts, which is essentially like cash cash, right? It's like paying for, you know, email in order to then, you know, so that you're not spamming essentially. So to pick those two as controversial ideas, I think that, you know, it kind of lends, uh, lends a bit to the, the idea that they're not really thinking about the underlying idea. They're just hating on whatever Elon Musk says. But, you know, someone in that position of power is always going to ruffle a lot of feathers. So yeah, I don't know whether it's good or bad, ultimately, I hope ultimately it's good. I hope that it doesn't become, it doesn't pengellum swing to the other side and that it becomes some sort of like, you know, a crazy platform of like chaos and, you know, destruction and, and that, you know, I just, you know, I think it just needs to reach an equilibrium. And how we get there, I don't know and I hope that if he does buy it, then it just doesn't go chaotic and, you know, things become a bit more fair all round rather than, you know, then just swinging one side or the other. I think Dan's reading a little bit from future advertisements for the service. A fantastic platform of chaos and destruction. The problem is, and I'm sure we're going to find this out altogether as a group, but free speech doesn't get you an Athenian democracy, right? It's not Plato and Socrates having a discussion in the square. Usually it's Plato throwing shit at Socrates while Socrates is posting pictures of Plato's ex girlfriend. Like, it goes to the lowest point as fast as it can. So the fears of an open source Twitter is probably an unregulated Twitter read IE 4chan and much of the conservative fears and the we de platform people. We really de platform people like they're behaving more like they're in 4chan, less in the Athenian democracy. And while that's a, that's a high goal. I think we could shoot for the middle in there and have more of a discussion based website. I fear for what Elon will do with Twitter and I also fear what will happen when he opens up the books and uncracks things and finds out there's not a giant censorship machine. It's more of this general problem of internet sludge like the sludge just rises and you as a startup, whether you're giving out Bitcoin loans or giving out people a platform where they can say words and pictures. The sludge will get to you. So I hope Elon is ready to fight the sludge of the internet trolls and the spam and the trash. Joshua, should golly your thoughts on Elon Musk taken over Twitter? Yeah, it's about time. I mean, he decided to buy this thing off a weird whim. I don't know why he sort of tweeted, Hey, what do you guys think of Twitter? This is important or something. And then the next week is like, yeah, okay, fuck it. I'll buy it. And then that's always how you want your executives to make their decisions to like throw them out on the side. Hey, should we get some Disney stuff this week? What do you think? Yeah, but at the end of the day, you know, I haven't gone through, I haven't gone through the list of texts and the text dump and stuff that happened. But I do know a thing or two about buying businesses. And if you're a big public figure, the way he went about it to try to lower the price was good. But I don't think he got a lower price in the end. I'm not sure. Do you guys remember what he originally offered? Was it 54 cents? It seems that this is still the original deal. And part of the problem was when he pulled back and claimed that there were too many bots or whatever his reason was legally, he didn't have a way to pull back. The contract was already rolling. The thing was rolling. So this is more like he's still buying Twitter. And I'm not sure it really went away. All right. Because generally what you want to do is, and this is typical modus operandi of the VC. And actually for anyone raising money as a startup, be wary of this because what will happen is the VC will tear you to shreds. And that's the whole point because they want to lower the valuation. And so you have to step fast and not listen to that nonsense and go, no, my product isn't that and have come back. Or just simply believe it. And this is kind of what he was doing. He's putting his VC hat on and slagging the shit out of Twitter to try and lower the valuation to then come back in with a new price. Hence, it didn't really work. Contrarily seems that it didn't work. But that's kind of what it felt like is a destroyer in the public square and then come in and snack on it. But, but yeah, I think it's good thing. Twitter needs disruption. It's been very stag- just stagnant. Like there's been no real true updates. There's been a few little things like, oh, let's make the heart like animate as he click it and stuff like that. But I come on things like edits and stuff and they've said, oh, how do we do edits without like confusing the hell out of people? Well, everyone else has solved this problem, man. But just you show the edits. You just click show edits. And then boom, you've got you've solved the problem. It's not a big deal. And you know, for those that think that it'll, it won't be censored. It will be censored with Elon. It has to be because otherwise you'll see God off or imagery. You'll see the worst of humanity. But you know, I mean, you can't just have, you know, this is why you got these poor souls that go through and check what people are uploading to see like heads being cut off and real murders and child. You know, just just awful, awful stuff that you never want to see. And so there's always a place for censorship. It's just how do you, how do you define that line where to go? And you know, it is really for me and my personal opinion on this is it's to pick on political. You know, to sort of skew your motivations to ban certain things on political talk or even on discussions of, let's say, vaccine hesitancy and stuff like that, I think it's really, really bad move because it stops the conversation. And if your conversation is true, then you should be able to back that up. And by just sort of banning stuff outright, first of all, you're not really stopping the conversation. Those people tend to go somewhere else and then get stuck in a silo and then strengthen their opinion. Rather than having an open dialogue with two opposing opinions, which is extraordinarily important. But yeah, well, let's see, let's see what happens. I think it's a good thing. I think, you know, must tends to push his employees to iterate very quickly to work and push updates. I mean, we're seeing stuff out of Tesla and and out of, well, yeah, mainly Tesla. In terms of these bots, the robot that they've come up with, if you look to the latest AI stuff, it stuff gets iterated very quickly. Updates come out often. That's very different to Twitter. I don't know what all their employees are doing to be honest. I don't get it. So yeah, I'm looking forward to it. It's interesting that Twitter is kind of a news site part of a debate website. But at the same time like Josh is saying, we want to try to find a way to have a positive debate, to have a constructive conversation. So many times it falls down into name calling and just personal attacks. And then especially as Josh is saying during a crisis, it's very confusing where a public platform should be between public safety, medical information, which again, is changing all the time because we just didn't know the virus information was coming in day at a time, just like any other scientific or historical project. And we just have to deal with that. But sadly, when Elon Musk was attacking Twitter, he was using Twitter to attack Twitter. So it never looked good in the in the interim there. I don't think he got the price down at all. Arnaugb, your thoughts on Elon taking over Twitter? Yes, I think Dan and Joshua highlighted almost all the relevant points. Let me give you some very crazy ideas on the table. So I have a conspiracy theory here. This is the conspiracy theory. So the reason why Elon wanted to buy the Twitter was to make a use case of dodgecoin. Doge finally is coming. So that was I think I think he wanted to make it like if you're tweeting and you're commenting on Twitter unless Elon's post, you need to spend a little bit in Doge. So you get the right to comment. So yeah, who knows? Maybe that's the ultimate motive of Elon finally gave a use case to his beloved Dogecoin and Twitter. Oh, and that's a. Let's ask the crew here. What do you guys think? Is it a good idea? I mean, obviously, maybe if you use lightning instead of Dogecoin, it would be okay to pay a few micro pennies to tweet. People who talk about this idea before you, basically for the audience, you punish the spammers. The spammers now have to pay and they don't get their money back. Whereas if the message goes out and it's not marked spam, you could actually give them their penny back. So it doesn't cost you to tweet. It's more like a reserve. But if you put a bad tweet out there that's labeled spam, then they'll take your micro penny. Dan, what do you think? Is this a good idea? Well, yeah, I think that like the hash cash idea had, you know, is a bit purely built on the idea of removing, you know, removing or reducing spam. So, you know, it comes from a good solid background of the thing. But whether Dogecoin is obviously the most appropriate coin for that, you know, it's probably not very scalable, right? Unless they have like, I know, some sort of, if they put lightning over Dogecoin, but which would be really silly, lightning obviously would be the best alternative. But even Jack Dorsey's sort of swung around, you know, and talked about Ethereum before. They implemented the Twitter, you can verify your profile via NNFT. So, you know, it would be best using lightning because that's the most scalable so far. But it wouldn't surprise me even if they come up with their own, to be honest, if Elon Musk really, you know, he obviously believes in cryptocurrency and Bitcoin, you know, specifically in the obviously flirts of Dogecoin all the time. Yeah, why wouldn't he create his own coin and then become, you know, even more insanely rich from pumping his own shit coin? It is sad because it's a really good idea. It's very similar to Hash Cash, as Dan said, but then he mentions Dogecoin. And there's just this huge rippling laugh through the room. And it's just, you're just not a very serious person if you're talking about Dogecoin at this point in Bitcoin history. Joshua, what do you think about the idea of using Dogecoin or maybe lightning to pay micro pennies to tweet? Then if your tweet's not spam, you get your micro pennies back, then we can pulmon it, punish all the spammers. Actually, don't see how there's any other solution. As we've moved forward, AI is getting, you know, these cap, cap, cap, cap, or cap, or capture images, whatever they're called, they're there, they're just a piece of piss for these, for these AI's to solve now. And there's not one that can, that you can invent that would differentiate humans from bots that bots can't do. Anyone can look at how far AI has jumped even in just in the last four months when it comes to Dolly too, when it comes to mid-journey that you can see right there. That's a very visual representation. How far it's come because a lot of people didn't see AI sneaking up on it and the evolution of AI. So the entire internet now, when the capture can be solved by an AI, what that means, and you have to really understand this, and most people really won't understand the level of bots that will overtake the internet to try to sell real human something. We'll be so extraordinary that most of the internet will be like 99.9999% of the internet will be robotically generated and robots talking like humans to try to get to sell you something. And even fooling other bots, so other bots will just be talking to each other, thinking that they're human. And so it'll just be a barrage of info from bots. So the only way to deal with that, and this isn't even a proper solution because the only way to really deal with that is to try to pay for every post that you do. Now what will generally happen is that bots will then need to enter the economy, and we in the Bitcoin space has talked about this a long time, that bots can't have a bank account. So robots will work with crypto. And so bots will have to start to enter the economy to even keep spamming. So they'll probably offer their spamming services for Bitcoin or Lightning or Doge, whatever it is. And then get paid in that to then also bypass that as a security measure. Because now they're getting paid, they're paying too, so they enter the economy. And now you've got a vastly larger economy using crypto. So that's even more of a bullish use case for Bitcoin. Because now you don't only have all the millions of people, you have the billions of bots also vague for the 21 million coins. And if it's Doge, it's something else. But you know, there's a huge shift coming to the internet in the next year. And no one's really ready for it. No one's really ready for the onslaught of spam that's coming. Well, and at that point, it might be possible for the bots to outbid the humans. If I'm not paying and willing to pay a dollar to tell you about my dinner, but the bots willing to pay a dollar to spam you about where to eat dinner, then the whole thing goes up and smoke and Elon's just got a big bot market going. Arnaud NASCAR, any more on a Twitter and the Elon takeover? So I think I agree with Josh on this point. You will not solve the problem of making people pay to tweet something. Because you're also kind of restricting, philosophically, it's very bad because you're making people pay to keep a coin. It doesn't matter. You can also use the bot to downward some posts. You can definitely do that. And spamming will be, as you mentioned, Thomas also, it's a slug. It will grow. It will not decrease. You cannot say you can make it completely open. It's an utopian thought, which you're trying to sell when you're raising capital from a VC fund. But that's not reality. Reality is different. And I totally agree when you are shitposting, you should pay in shitcoins. Shit goes together. I'd shit and shit out. Why do you spend coin when you're shitposting? That could be cool. And like you said before, a legitimate use for dogecoin. Finally, let's go to the exit question. Protect the future. Yes or no, Elon Musk taking over will be good for Twitter. Dan Eve, good for Twitter. Yes or no? I'm going to go, I'm going to go, yes, because I think he's still, as Josh said, he's still going to uphold the general censorship rules, especially around the leap from the legal front. So maybe that there will end up being more and up being more pressure from the actual government to censor or to force Twitter to censor rather than Twitter self-sensoring. So obviously, the Twitter sentence is anything that's illegal at the moment, then there's probably, there's going to be in different countries, different levels of things that need to be censored. In Germany, they can't say certain things. I've seen a few people saying, I've not been able to post something or read something because it says the government's enforced this. And you'll see that in other countries as well. But go back to what Josh said about the fact that you won't even know you're talking to a bot. I can see the synergies there with that theory that we're living in a simulation because it's more than likely that we are. We're just like the odds are that we're living in a simulation. And if you think when technology and AI reaches a certain level of intelligence, you're going to be in a position where most people you probably speak to are going to be simulations online. It's really bad enough as it is for people using fake accounts, right? But they're real people using fake accounts. Now, people are going to have soon. People just have bots doing it all for them. So, you know, you won't even be catfished by a human. You'll be catfished by a chip. They're saying in the chat they want their payments for this week. They want to get paid. Everyone push the thumbs up button if you want to get paid. Josh Wissigalo, what about Twitter? Is Elon Musk taking over good or bad? What up? It's good. That's it. Just good. Arnav Nazcar. Good or bad for Twitter? Awesome. And it's something we'll have on Twitter, right? Now, nothing is happening. So come on. I think it's big Facebook's next. That's right. They are doing something. I think it's good for Twitter, but maybe not the Twitter that you're thinking of. I think it's good for the original holders of Twitter and for the coders and everybody else who's getting an exit. The Twitter website has always been a mix of news and personal things that need to be going out right away to everybody and things that need to be going out right away to just a few people. And they never could get monetization right. Advertising never felt right. They never offered us a subscription service that we gladly would have paid for. But Twitter has always been kind of not quite Facebook, not quite Google. And I'll bet they're excited to have this exit to be done with it, to not have to worry about what Twitter needs to be. Now that's Elon Musk's problem. So an awesome exit for the original Twitter people. $44 billion, $5420, a share. That's a good price. Did you know the World Crypto Network has its own website at worldcryptonetwork.com? You can check out all the shows. We've got three thousand and nine videos. Check out the sidebar where Joshua Shagalla has just passed Jimmy Song in total shows. And Dan Eve is gaining on tone veys. We've also got on this day where you can find out other videos that the World Crypto Network and Mad Bittcoins created on this day. Looks like last year we had a Kerio cards party in 2018. We were live from hackers Congress in 2017. We were live from hackers Congress again in 2016. We've got some Bitcoin Group 112 episode right there more from 2014 and even 2013 all on today the seventh of October at worldcryptonetwork.com. Issue three Kim Kardashian charged by the SEC agrees to pay a $1.3 million fine. Yes, Kim Kardashian was promoting Ethereum Max, an altcoin that disappeared on her Instagram without disclosing it was a promotion. Unlike Larry David or Matt Damon who used commercials in the standard language of promotion to promote things. Kim Kardashian, Floyd, Floyd, Mayweather and several other celebrities got caught up and charged more money than they made. Joshua Shagalla, all the scams come down to earth. What about Kim Kardashian and Ethereum Max? Keeping in mind that she has I believe a billion dollars and they charged her 1.3 million. That's less than 1 1,000 of her wealth. Again, I feel and I've said this before that people need to learn by touching the flame. They need to learn what fire feels like. I see this a lot. People trust some YouTuber or something like that who obviously has bags of some coin and then talks about a lot and then dumps the coin. This is just the nature of things. This is the nature of humanity. Of course, if you have a large megaphone, it doesn't take many brain cells to go, I might buy this, talk about it and it'll go up. I think it's more about education because you can, I see this only as a cash grab from the SEC. It doesn't teach anyone anything. It doesn't stop this from happening. People will just continue doing it. What really needs to happen is the SEC should actually take that 1.3 million and put it into education maybe and teaching people what scams look like, how they work. If you send some random Twitter account one Bitcoin, they're not going to send you two back, even if it does have Elon Musk's face on it. Just educating the people now instead they'll just find the people. It's just a cash car for them. In fact, it's so bad that the game theoretically, it's set up that they don't want that stuff to stop because then the cash will stop. They don't want people to stop doing that really because they'll stop getting fines. The government doesn't really want to stop people speeding because then the speeding fines will stop. Instead, they'll keep on finding people instead of working better roads or something. The only way to help people is to educate them on what scams look like. I look forward to their public relations commercials. This is your brain on a scam. Don't let your brain fall to a scam. But no, I thought there wasn't enough fine. She has far too much money. She made far too much money. Josh is right. None of this money went to the victims. None of this money helps any of the people that purchased Ethereum Max and thought it would be a real project. It is funny to say that some advertising is okay and other advertising is not okay when we see how much alcohol and cigarettes and other things can destroy people's lives physically destroying their bodies. Even crazy prescription drug ads all over my TV. All of them destructive in their own ways, which they read the little disclaimer for. So it is interesting. Some advertising is good, some advertising is bad. But once again, they're just far too late. The sheriffs came in. All the cows are gone. Everyone's made their money. Arnaud Nazcar, what do you think of Kim Kardashian facing the ultimate $1.3 million fine? It's a joke. Fucking joke. Come on. This lady has crazy amount of money. As Josh mentioned, it's just a joke. It should not be a news also to be very fracked. I don't think it's a penny that she got from her last divorce. It's nothing. It's just a mockery. It's a mockery. She made more money and who knows how much she actually got from weird shit coins also, which is sold with ether or something like that. Nobody knows it. And I think this kind of stuff should be stopped. I think SEC is making fun of all these kind of scams. So it's kind of an exit opportunity for a lot of scammers from me. It's nothing more than that. Are they really teaching Kim not to do this next time? Are they teaching her not to get caught next time? Next time you need to do a better job. You need to get more money under the table. You need to use Monero, whatever it is. They're just they're training better scammers. I feel. No, I think it's much better like you are giving them a price of scamming. So you should know, you should not scam of 10,000 to people. You should scam off something around a billion. Then you pay around 10% of it and they leave. So till you are making money out of 90% that makes it legitimate. And still so many other crypto scammers are out there not even paying a parsley Dan Eve. What about Kim Kardashian once she broke the internet? Now she's breaking finds. Well, I definitely, well, first of all, Ethereum Max. That just makes me feel it makes me like vomit in my mouth. Well, thank you. Well, what if we put a plus on there? Pluses are very popular. Ethereum Max plus plus. Also, she did in fairness, right? In fairness, she did in this tweet, well, series of tweets. She did put hashtag ad, right? So she kind of, like, you know, I think they kind of almost got her on a gotcha there, right? In fairness. And 1.3, I know I'm no Kim Kardashian fan by any stretch. I can't watch the program when it's under the background. The girl from watch is just like, it's just boring, right? Not sickening, but she's boring. It's a bit, but come on, I think you know, 1.3 million, I think it's actually what it was the biggest find so far is more than wayweathering and the others got fined. Well, it's very significant amount. And I think having the hashtag ad in there, I do think it's a bit overkill. But at the same time, it's significant compared to our overall wealth of 1.7 billion dollars, like they said, it's only a hundred dollar fine. Now, so the app compared to what the average person would have had in terms of the average household. So if you're saying, like, oh, what she did had such a massive impact, that if it was a normal person, they'd be fined at a hundred dollars. Like, most people would laugh at a hundred dollars in fairness. So even even those 1.3 million, it's a lot. If they're really saying it's as bad as they think they're saying it is, then it should have been more than 1.3 million simple ads. But what I think was quite funny was that a few of Gensers comments. So one, the fact that he said, the investing public shouldn't confuse the skills, the skills of celebrities with the very different skills needed to offer appropriate investment advice. Now, like, they don't have any skills when it comes to investment advice. They're just literally being paid by someone to shield it. So that's one thing that's definitely very true is that, you know, these people don't care that it's going to go up or down. They can't, they're getting 300k for shielding something. The fact that she also got, she's like, as part of the deal, the fine, she promised not to shield anything for three years. So Kim Kardashian, at least we're safe now for three years. She's not going to be shielding any shite coins for another three years. But some of the other hashtags, like that other hashtags you put on there was Disrupt History. You know, Disrupt, Disrupt History with Ethereum Max plus. Oh, the whole thing just makes you want to want to curl up and cry. But go back to Josh's point. I think that what it really is, you know, is sad is that this money isn't like every thing every time a fine happens, it would be great if they were like, it's like a donation to charity, they're like, with this 1.3 million, 300,000 went into education. One, you know, 500,000 went into this, 500,000 went into that. But it doesn't, it just gets cycled into the system and it becomes this giant money churning thing that doesn't really have any value other than stifling industries and sort of just, you know, trying to create court cases. It's basically that 1.3 million is almost certainly going to just go to lawyers in other court cases trying to try their luck on other things that they think are dodgy, that the SEC says is dodgy and trying to find out, you know, it's like a, it's basically a gambling machine for the SEC. They want to put their money in, they're going to, they think they're what their odds of winning are and they may win, they may lose. If they win, they get more money if they lose, they pay some legal fees, but their legal fees were paid by a previous person, they see it anyway. So it doesn't actually help anyone overall. It just profit, makes more profit for for lawyers. And I think that's what the sad thing, right? You want to see a net positive effect from all this. I totally agree with Josh from that. Like you, you want to see that the money's going somewhere and helping the people that are meant to be now disadvantaged because of the people that they're suing. Like, and it doesn't make sense not to do that. Yeah, and not only that, I mean, when when when we had John McAfee shilling his stuff, like everyone knew what was happening, generally, if you had a half a half a head on, come on. Now you couldn't, it was unfortunately, unfortunately, Josh, there, I agree that all the crypto people and we were all laughing, but sadly, there are a lot of other people that come into a new sphere and they're like that new guy at the bar and they're just like, what am I going to buy? What am I going to invest in? There's this slot machine over here and there's this slot machine over here and they all look the same to him and he sees the McAfee logo or he sees Kim Kardashian's beautiful body and he's like, that's why I'm going to tell him making my decision. But investment decisions. I mean, previously, yeah, yeah, I mean, I agree, but I don't have the data for this point, but I'm guessing it's probably right. The amount of money lost through that is insignificant to the amount of money lost through like the latest scam is I see it all the time on Twitter. Why isn't anyone talking about this? And then it's a video link to like to write your own arbitrage but to front run uni. Now, if you're looking into a deeper, it uses dependencies that you have to link up and then install on your servers or on your local machine and that's basically a bot that will steal your crypto or checks your clipboard or whatever. So as long as it shows it going down, as long as it shows you the experience of the thing, it's kind of fair. You're like, you got your ride. I just have to say that there's so many scams. The SEC's picking on one tiny little scam, which is famous people talking about something and not disclosing and she even said hashtag ad. I don't know, but but really again, it comes back to education. It comes back to people actually understanding that, hey, I bought this thing from McAfee and the next day it went down. I did it again. It went down probably not going to do that again because now I get what's going on. And I'm going to tell my friends not to do that. And you know, this is how it works. The state constantly shielding people is only harmful in the long run. I see if they're not using that money to educate and yeah, I don't know. It does it does seem like all roads lead back to critical thinking and understanding propaganda or advertising. And if we teach the people enough critical thinking, then they'll understand the propaganda and the advertising, which would be good for avoiding scams, but bad for all the work we have to do with the propaganda and the advertising. So it's almost as if we keep people ignorant. We defy that most things need research, most things need thought. You don't get anything for easy like Joshua saying the Elon Musk's or the Ethereum or whatever. Send us your one Bitcoin and we'll send you two back. It sounds too good to be true. It probably is. But if you were fired up and you were in the right mindset and you were watching the video and you're getting exciting about Bitcoin and you think sure Elon or Bill Gates or whoever it is has lots of money, they'll send me, you know, double. You could do it and you could fall to this kind of thing. So it really is education and critical thinking. And what you were saying, the last bit of what you're saying, Josh, it reminds me of a famous famous saying by someone who said, there's an old saying in Tennessee. No, it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, for me once, shame on you, for me, you can't get fooled again. I think you're saying George W. Bush. George W. I think moments in history. I'm going to throw a shoe at you now. Yeah. A classic. We've got to make the pie higher. But let's move on to the next issue issue five Celsius to closed and it disclosed names and transaction history of all users during bankruptcy. Any wallet that interacted with Celsius is now publicly linked to your government ID. The court had a choice. They could have made this information public or they could have widened it out and redacted it. They chose to make it public. So once again, if you interacted with the Celsius exchange, if you put your information in there, your information is now in a court document. Many people saying that they're Bitcoin or Ethereum wallets could now be exposed, leading them to harassment and perhaps even theft and violence. Arnaud, what do you think about Celsius and more over the court disclosing this information? Yes, I think the drama that is happening with Celsius in the last, I would say, a couple of weeks, which is painful for a lot of people in the industry and the current market. A lot of people are lost. And Celsius was definitely, you know, the market, like Alex is a marketing machine, right? He was definitely as a marketing genius and he caught all these big players thinking, you know, Celsius is a safe space to put their money in. But somehow, all this party works perfectly fine when the party light is going on and the music is on. The moment you turn off the music, then you will really know what is the real sound behind it. We are all seeing everybody is holding back full of shit coins and some anchor protocol from his them, some 20% return, which never happened and then some three-adow capital promise them to the moon and to the Mars. And now they cannot even pay for their yacht. And then you are holding back of nothing, right? And then the only thing that can save you of Celsius is that classic age old Bitcoin and the Bitcoin mining thing, which can only sell because other, like other assets cannot bail them out. And it's painful to see how the process is going. And now we see Alex, I think resigned last week itself, though what is coming to the news and this is from the coin desk and other news channel, they have withdrawn over 42 million of their own money before Celsius went bankrupt. See, this is criminal to be very frank, right? You do not do that. If you know something is going wrong and they knew withdrawing and then still tweeting out everything is fine, this is criminal. This is not something that has in like you cannot justify and still staying the CEO till last few weeks and still supporting and telling, you know, hey, trust me, I give you all the money back, just believe in me and my mining business will go up. This is not working. And I think to a certain extent now I was following in the Twitter session, I see Simon Dixon is really, you know, having one side of the, you know, camp then there's some others on the other side of the camp. And I think now things are going into much more interesting discussion. I see Simon is taking much more, I would say proactive role. And also it was found out after weeks that Alex never had a plan. Alex was always relying that somebody will magically come out of plan and he will still be the CEO and will be still in the driving seat. But, you know, nothing comes out of free, right? There is no free lunch. And Alex says learning, hopefully there will be much more to it. But one thing which is, as Thomas you mentioned also here is there is I was checking actually before I can have something in the afternoon around 14,000 pages have been disclosed, right? 14,000 pages of investor's name has been issued. At least they're intelligent enough not to put the addresses. That's at least not there visible. So thanks to the intelligence on that at least. But generally the names are out there. And yeah, this is I think you may say, okay, KYC is kind of, you know, you are legitimizing and hacked, right? Now they say, okay, it's legitimate because it's an official documents, right? But there are other ways you could have done it, right? It doesn't have to be so publicly because I don't think XYZ who has nothing to do with Celsius really cares about this public names. So I think that sensitivity is missing and this is actually what we see is regulators are not equipped to manage a digital platform. The laws and regulators does not have any idea what they're dealing with. So trusting them is trusting, you know, a kind of wall, which has no clue. And this is I think I think the structure is there like you are going to all the bankruptcy process and everything, but they do not appreciate the fact that you're dealing with digital platform or digital business where people's real money is connected to the digital wallet and which you can trace back. It's not the bank money is with some Swiss bank or some, you know, French bank or something like that. So yeah, this is I think it's a very bad way. So once so first you lose your own money, then you lose your data. Now, who knows what else you will kind of lose there. So it's kind of the entire the series of events that is happening with all the services investors is very painful to watch and how things are unfolding. Hopefully, you know, there will be some kind of way out because I don't think nobody will fill the hole. Sam may buy this at a very cheap price because then the investors will anyways be holding nothing because Sam will not fill the hole. He will maybe in a buy it at discount. So there will be loss of somebody has to digest the loss. Now, the question is how we do come up and how long it will take to pay all the legal fees and all these court fees before some money is paid out to the investor. This is also a very important question to watch. It is interesting. It's almost like a corollary to not your keys, not your coins, not your data once you give it away. And a lot of these people here were good customers of Celsius. They filled out all the forms. They put all their proper information in. And then now the company and especially the court are screwing them over by releasing that information. So once you have KYC, once you are in the system, you are at at the mercy of this system. Just as we saw Elon Musk with his tweets and his texts that were leaked now all of this public or previously private information has leaked on these investors. And like Arnaud was saying, when the good times are there and the music is playing and everything is fine, it's amazing to see what these people say and what they say their companies are capable of. I was watching coffee zilla again the other day and they were talking about Tara and Luna. And one of the ideas floated is that Luna just wasn't big enough that it would have been bigger and more people would have lost money. But then maybe the scam would have worked or the little interesting back and forth. It would have had less deviation. If only it was bigger, which no one ever says after a scam, you never like after the Hindenburg. If only we packed more passengers in there or the Titanic, you know, we could have had a sale. We could have put some more customers on there. This is a whole new idea in the crypto space. Dan Eve, what do you think about Celsius? And of course, there's still space available on the Hindenburg and the Titanic. Well, I'm with Arnaud on this. This is it's crazy that that machines get just got to, you know, to bail out and to carry on tweeting and carrying on as if nothing had happened and, you know, saved his assets. And no one's going to ever probably go out or go after them, right? There's very few people that actually go down with the with the ship. It does sound like, you know, with Celsius, there's it's not all completely over yet. I think Sam back with free discussed how they would do a takeover of Celsius assets like they did with Voyager. So it doesn't seem like it's quite over over yet, but from the KYC side of things like, you know, and you made a good point about not your keys, not your coins. But if I give my OCE to be like really quite open about giving my KYC documents, I wouldn't really care about how to think, you know, these guys are, you know, they're just, you know, it's very unlikely something would go wrong with it. But then you only need to do it like check like porn.com and I'll, you know, whatever it's PWND, NED and see how often your passwords lead and just think how many times data's lead and you don't even know about it. How many times your KYC, your password's been shifted around somewhere and you don't even know, right? That information's been bought by someone when you get like a bunch of like stupid dumb emails that target you. That's not sometimes that's often that's not what you've just signed up for for some random service. That's somebody's bought your information and it's targeted. You know, you've got X amount of cash and that you're, you know, from an exchange and that you probably want to spend it on their products. Like they're very, very sophisticated these, these hacks and it's very easy. Unfortunately, as you know, I've worked in a lot of places and seen a lot of places where the rules are so lax about data that you could easily just copy an entire database and set it on like unfortunately. There's not even an easy way of protecting that, you know, especially if you work in IT like you have access to so many things. So yeah, I don't know, it's, it's a lot more wary about giving my KYC out. Now even to whatever a business it is because anyone can be susceptible, you know, we've seen it with Facebook accounts with all the sort of big tech giants who you think would be absolutely airtight, right? These are big silicon valley people like places and there shouldn't be any jatileats or password breaches or anything like that. There was even a huge one with Sony, wasn't there a few years ago? Like nothing is, is infallible. You know, from that respect. And in the list of Celsius people, Celsius users, they were, I remember reading the list of just some of the, I think someone can part of like a list of the main ones that are worth noting. And it's, their customers were anyone from like the W E F to the world government to like random businesses to like Walmart and all like, I think it was Walmart. Just absolutely amazing. You like plethora of businesses you'd never have thought would be deadly dallying in crypto. And that was really quite an eye opener. But last thing on this was that the, my favorite quote about the whole situation was from from Casey Newton on Twitter, which is two Celsius founders have now resigned for contacts. If a context, that's 35.6 founders in Fahrenheit. That was a great joke. Excellent joke online. I agreed, Dan. A lot of people give up their KYC far too easily. But remember, they're giving it up because they're going to get that killer altcoin and they're going to win big money or they're going to get 10% off their groceries or they're going to something else. There's a reason. And they always give it up. And I also want to agree with Dan most places. You could probably copy the entire database, not even leave a log. Or if it does leave a log, the same person copying that database has the access to edit the logs. So we're not in a good place on computer security still. And we're just putting more and more data into these computers. Joshua, should you go all the way to think about the court's decision to leak all of the Celsius investors, probably getting yourself a roll of decks out there. I mean, I think it's a bonnumination. It's too late for this. This is a bonnation. A bonnation. No, it really is shocking. Absolutely shocking. And it shows that the state or at least the courts don't understand what this thing is, what crypto is. Because it's a bearer based asset. It's very, very dangerous for people to be doxed. This happened a lot after the ledger leak, where people were getting threats of violence. We know where you live, hand over some money, all this sort of stuff. It's very, very dangerous. So I think there needs to be a lawsuit. Because that sort of thing just cannot happen. You cannot, these poor people lost all their money. And now they get this punishment as well. And for those that don't know how bad it is to have your identity stolen, a friend of mine, he went to get a debit, what was it, a new SIM card or something, a phone contract. And he got denied his, I'm like an upstanding citizen. And it turns out his identity be stolen by some leak or some hack from some KYC thing that then got leaked. The attackers use the identity to open bank accounts, take loans out in his name, and of course didn't pay it back. He got a black mark. This was years and years ago, guys. And he had, he worked for, I don't know, like six years trying to get that black mark off his name, off his credit score, six years. And then what happened, this is not funny, but it's just nuts. It was like a year later, it happened to him again. Because his identity was already out there. His identity was already floating around everywhere. So once it's gone, it's gone. Once this here is gone, your biometrics are out there and all the data are to it, it's gone. Then it's pretty much hard to claw back. And this is why I've been a big, big proponent for building new systems where you build an avatar online and you give reputation to that. And if that gets come, and this would be through a private key, that you can then turn off if it gets stopped, like if it somehow gets compromised. But the way that we're doing it right now with biometrics and holding things across your face, and again, this goes back to a point I said before with bots and AI getting better and better, it's only a matter of time until deep fakes can pretend to be anybody. And open accounts, something does need to be done with KYC. I think it's absolutely atrocious that the court released this data. What the hell are they thinking? It should be a suitable offense. And I'm really shocked. And I'm back Simon Dixon in everything he's doing there. I thought, I don't know why anyone was putting money in the cell scene the first, but I looked at it and I was like, why would you let a third party? Why would you let Wall Street D-Gens play with DeFi D-Gens with your money? It doesn't make sense. But anyway, I hope they get someone takes them to to call it better. I'm sure it's all going to work out. That's awfully, I'd wait six years to get his identity back. I think Tara Luna, Doe Kwan, they gave him a second chance to make Luna two in like six days. And they lost all that money too. So it is very bad out there. We're going to have to move on. Luna, that's what they need. They just need the third time. They weren't ready the first two. But we're moving on to issue five. European Union announces new sanctions against Russia, including a ban on all Russian Bitcoin wallets. Yes, they're actually trying to sanction the Bitcoin now. We're running a bit out of time. Arnaug, will they be successful in stopping the flow of Bitcoin out of Russia? How? It seems they're going, it seems like they're doing a personal approach. They're going more user by user. And maybe if you're a Russian oligarch, they won't let you send. But if you're just a normal Russian person, maybe you could send a couple hundred bucks. It does seem difficult. It could not stop wirecard circling billions and billions of money. After leaving getting, I don't know, you have heard about this interesting German company wirecard, which is publicly said company, that had the same vision as Luna, that if they buy dutchabang, they can actually close all their balance sheet problems. But it doesn't happen. Sometimes you have to realize that this smaller scam cannot eat a bigger scam and then became a legitimate business. This is a problem. And yeah, I think to be very frank, sometimes all the sanctions, sanctions is a good tool overused for years. Now literally, they don't have anything. So they have to publish something. So tomorrow, they will sanction Russian poop coming to the water and something they will do in that regard. But I don't know how they will stop it. The same way is the bit like it's crazy. There's like people are paying high amount of salaries in the European commissions and parliament and those things. And they still the thing like they can do it. Now earlier, they said, okay, within 10,000 USD euro Bitcoin, blah blah blah, you can transact. Now you cannot transit anything. But how can you enforce? You are like literally you are encouraging people to create a parallel economy. And that's what will happen. There will be a parallel Bitcoin economy, which will never come to centralized exchange. Never will go through channel analysis process and never will go through any kind of transactions. And this is what I think the movement towards the de-dollarization as we're talking about, right? You are legitimately encouraging for creating alternative currency in the world. And more and more alternative currencies will be created as more and more sanctioned craziness will come. It does seem like a real strisand moment for a cryptocurrency's beating sanctions. And of course, reminds me of that classic line from Star Wars. The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers. Dan, what about this harsh approach to Russian Bitcoin sanctions? Well, I mean, you know, initially they did say that we, you know, we're not going to sanction the Russian people, which is sanctioning the Yollegarks. And now dropping it from 10,000 euros to everyone, it's like, you know, they're obviously changing it now. Obviously the ball games changed in terms of how the the war or the strategic operation has played out. But, you know, this is, it's just going to be a game of technological cat and mouse that they're never going to win because the, you know, even if it's a few picks Bitcoin specifically, then people can use mixes to then buy wrapped Bitcoin on another chain and then disappear altogether. Like the only way I can see this being done effectively at the moment is just by them, exchanges that agree to it or who are bowed down to it, sanctioning or sort of freezing the accounts that are already on system that are KYC, you know, that for new accounts, you can use all sorts of proxies and other things to be able to mask your address and whatever and pretend that you're not. You can, how about you could buy someone's fake ID if you're Russian and just using a thread from Shropshire in England. And, and then that way you're not Russian. You're using, you know, using an exchange on behalf of someone else who's ID got stolen by, by a company that had poor security sort of rules. Or for court release the names. Or for court release the names, yeah. So it's, you know, there's plenty of ways they can sidestep it. And I just think it, the people that are most likely to be able to avoid it are the rich anyway. So effectively, you're penalising the smaller fish, which is the worst thing to do because the rich have far more options to them unless they're super duper rich and they're already on some sort of crazy list. The rich have got far more options and, and around being able to scoot their money here, they're in everywhere and advisors and stuff like that that they can use. Whereas the average Joe or the average, I'm trying to think of an average Russian name, you know, doesn't have that to their access. You're penalising the people that may not necessarily be the actual root cause of the problem. So I don't know. I think it's just a game that you're never going to lose, right? Crypto was built, was built to be government resilient. And, yeah, although exchanges can be involved and you can tighten the reins on exchanges, then there's other cryptocurrencies you can screw into to kind of temporary hold your Bitcoin whilst it being on another chain whilst you evade your authorities in some way. And, you know, I'm not saying it's a tool that can be used for that way. You know, it's just like saying, well, if it went cars around, you could use a car to drive away from bad trouble. But that happens in that's trouble that's after you in a bad way or a good way, right? The fact is that it's just a, you know, an everlasting technological cat and mouse game. So I don't really think it's lowering the amount is going to have the effect that they think it's going to have. It does seem like limiting transaction, whether it's a cap like a $10,000 transaction limit or a $1,000 per trade transaction limit is just going to lead to people getting more accounts and to working their way around that, which as Dan said, pretty soon you are punishing the small person because a $1,000, $10 transactions is still a lot of money. It's still 10 grand. They're getting around it. Joshua Scala, your thoughts on this? Yeah, it's, you know, it's kind of like the European Union now bans Russians from doing math. It's just a weird thing to say. But also, it seems to me like a little bit of a dress rehearsal for trying to ban crypto in general. To see how far they can squeeze the on and off ramps. And yeah, so I think what they don't really understand is that the on and off ramps are just stage one of rollout of crypto. Eventually everything stays within crypto. Eventually people get paid in crypto. Eventually defy takes over banking in terms of being able to earn some sort of interest by taking out inefficiencies of the legacy market and be able to drop your money directly into an automated market maker to earn rewards rather than putting in a bank which gives it to a third party which gives it to a fund which gives it to another party which gives it to a lawyer which gives it to another party which then invests that money into a head into it into a market to earn some interest and then pay all the people all the way back up until you get the little pittance of interest into your bank account. Hey, let's just scrap all of that. Indeed, fire. I mean, the legacy world cannot compete. And so everything's heading towards internalizing in being on the internet. And so these sorts of moves to ban Russia like the other panelists have said, you just can't. It's anti-fragile. And I think they'll understand the word the meaning of anti-fragile is that you attack Bitcoin or crypto as a whole and the sphere figures out how to get around it and patches it up and then 10 minutes later there's a fix. So yeah, I just think if anything, all this does is test how they can do it and maybe they'll say like, oh, well, that didn't work and they'll try another approach on how to ban crypto in the European Union when needed when the CBDCs come out. And finally, today we have a philosophical question, kind of a ship of Thesis question. There's been a new NFT, put that in quote marks, developed and discovered on the Ethereum network. The NFT from I believe 2014 allowed you to register a .og domain name. However, the system was never built out and only around 60 domain names were registered in the original time period. However, people have rediscovered the NFT domain name system. And since then, registered, I believe more than 500,000 domain names on this system. The question now is much like the ship of Thesis, which is more valuable, the original 60 domain names or the 500,000 new domain names that were made with the old equipment. As Darryl Morley from the Philadelphia 76ers says, I'm in the not very vocal majority or minority. If a contract date is primary, it would be like getting the plates to print honus Wagner baseball cards, but running it now and then valuing the card that you just made as the same as the card from 1909. Dan Eve, do these new domain names, minted with this old system, have value. Well, if the domain can be used, right, if you can still buy an .og, obviously the oldest ones are always going to be historically the ones of more interest, right, because they're the first ones. So it's that kind of, it's that scarcity thing, right, so that this the original 60, but at the end of the day, if you can still use that domain, it can still have value to it. You can still set it onto Google and just that they can have google.org or something like that. So, yeah, that could be something like that. Currently, the system to use the domain names was never built out. This is a very test project. They now are claiming that an open source group of programmers motivated by the desire to sell these domain names is allegedly going to build out the rest of the project. I'm not sure, I'm not sure what the roadmap was. Also, these domain names are case sensitive. So if you own capital J, Jake, and you don't own lowercase J, Jake, it's just a complete nightmare. But that sounds very confusing. That's going to be really confusing. And you could just miss it. It does. It's an uppercase D lowercase A uppercase and lowercase E up, you know, that's the kind of thing you'd think through when you were launching the project, but wasn't thought through. Josh Worshikala, what do you think? They use the old plates, but they made new modern NFTs. Do they have value? No, they don't have value. The whole thing doesn't have value until you can actually get a large scale browser or some adoption of the OGs to actually render to a server or to a point to an IP. Before that, you're just selling NFTs in a way of text. So, you know, never say never, I mean, the shit that people trade is unbelievable. So, you know, I definitely so say it has no value, because people add value to things that they just love. And we personally know on this panel, people that are buying a lot of domain names on the, what was the system called? Well, that's what I was going to say. There are two other domain name systems. There's Han Shake, and there's ENS. Han Shake is trying to be a full domain system. They have a copy of Bitcoin. They have their own technology stack and they are a company. ENS allows you to send money to a wallet with a name like Vitaleck.Eath. You could send him a dollar. So, those are both built out and name coin. These are all built out functional systems in comparison to this kind of found system. Yeah, it seems to me like a quick cash grab on like on the back of, hey, this is an early NFT project. It is interesting to see the comparisons between it being a true early NFT or it being an early NFT production facility that was only used to print 60. In comparison with CurioCards, a full disclosure my own project, we actually printed all of our NFTs in 2017 and then sent them to the vending machines. So, the people who purchased them from the vending machine in 2021 were actually getting an NFT that was made in 2017. Arnaud, what do you think about the idea that these new NFT domain names could be valuable despite the fact that the system to use them is not built out? It's similar to like this. I have a very, very beautiful shell came from the water. It's a unique piece actually to be very frank. One, you will only find one in the entire world. It's scarce, but will you pay me a billion bucks for this? Scarsity does not give the value. It's a real utility with the scarcity, right? As Joshua mentioned, like without a utility that is no value, you know, this is scarce, but it's not valuable in that regard. Or you want to pay me something, I'm happy to take it to be very frank. And that is always the thing about collectibles, it's worth as much as the next person wafer it. So, in this case, many people lined up. They're very excited in this time period to purchase. But I worry if they think I had a little six months from now, a year from now, two years from now, will there be anyone to purchase their domain names that are case sensitive and currently non-functional? I think it's a fascinating debate, a fascinating discussion. Everyone has the value and the right to their own opinion. If you're crazy about these things, good for you. If you took a pass, that's fine as well. But we just want to discuss it as a philosophical idea. Let us know in the comments or the chat down below. Also, we forgot to tell you to push like a bunch of times today. So just pretend we said push like like a dozen times and you're like, they broke me down by saying it a dozen times and now I'm pushing it. So let's go to the end of the show. Arnaub, are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? Go ahead. I think Biden today told about the nuclear situation, right? We are kind of in a crisis, which is first time after that, I think the Cuban Missile Crisis, right? So maybe the next week we'll hear something from Elon again, hey, why not buy some nuclear warheads instead of buying Twitter? Yeah, it would be good if only he could purchase all the warheads at once. Dan, if prediction or story of the week, go ahead. Yeah, I heard that instead of buying tweets of a 54 billion, why does it keep buying everyone a nuclear warhead instead? Right? It's only that would end well. So my prediction or a story of the week, as usual, I'm tremendously prepared and I am going to predict the future and the future I predict will be that I think that I think musculoskeletal changes mind again. I reckon he'll try and you turn. I reckon he will try not to buy tweets of for some reason. He'll pick some some idea out of the sky and it might just be just to mess people around or just to kind of, I don't know, just to just to toy with everyone. But that'll be my little teeny prediction. I look forward to the future where Elon Musk says he's buying pizza hut, but then he says, oh, I just meant for dinner. Are you guys just don't get it? Joshua, should call a prediction or story of the week. Go ahead. Oh, but you're muted. It doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way. The story of the week is we finally got the Dow tooling set up on the standard IOs. So now we outsourcing a lot more work using dwork.xyz, which is really cool because now the community can start picking up bounties and working for the standard IO on the protocol, which I really love and other community members pay for those bounties as well as the core team. So there's some really cool stuff happening there. It's really exciting. So go check out the standard IO and help out. Very cool. We're running out of time. Thanks so much to everybody for joining us. Thanks to Arnold for being our guest. And until next time, bye.