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, Josh Shigalla from thestandard.io. Howdy, folks. Howdy, howdy. Dan Eve, the crypto raptor. Well, I Bitcoin amigos. Wasim Alcindy from 0X Salon. Good evening, everybody. It's always a pleasure to be here. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the world crypto network. Moving on to our topics. Issue one, Bitcoin rallies to touch highest level since April, as traders get bullish on ETF news. Yes, we're finally getting an ETF. BlackRock, the major investment company is suddenly interested in Bitcoin and backing and ETF allegedly. They've put in an application for a spot Bitcoin ETF, which we've seen rejected multiple times. I think we've been talking about Bitcoin ETF since the first year of the Bitcoin Group about nine or 10 years ago. We thought it would be easy to go over the basics. Again, people can invest their retirement, their retirement money in the stock market into an ETF. They don't have to hold keys or know anything. Josh Shigalla, we've been talking about Bitcoin ETFs for almost 10 years, but judging by the price jump, this must be serious. What's different this time? Yeah, I think the bankers are rocking into town and it's not really a good thing. In my mind, I think it's another tether to the old school world that we just don't need. We don't need us to be tethered to these large money suppliers. It's all funny money crap. Anyway, they've printed out a thin air. They've given it to their mates on Wall Street and they're going to buy Bitcoin with it. I don't really care. I mean, yeah, it'll pump the money, but the thing is if you're pumping a rare asset, something with intrinsic value with fakeness, it's only going to pump up for a while and then it's going to dump down because it's been pumped with nonsense. But yeah, I mean, any good price action is good because what happens is that businesses in this space do well. For those that say price doesn't matter. It's just not true. It does matter when when you have a business in the space, you really see the volume change and the interest change when you start seeing larger price moves on the way up. Well, and I'll say that it's getting harder and harder to find any stories for this show that aren't about the price. When I Google just Bitcoin on Google news, it is price, price, price, price, price. It's their own version of the why is the Bitcoin price this today? Now, Dan, Eve, I see that last week we predicted Bitcoin would go up and now it's significantly up. Obviously, we had a triangle chart to prove this. Indeed. I have two weeks predictions in a row, right, which is probably like more. That's the my record ever. But you know, it's all I hate to say it and I hate to be one of those kind of, you know, conspiracy theory guys, but it does seem, you know, a little bit more. A little coincidental right. So, you know, weeks after Coinbase, finance, Gengsood and all that, all the fards in the media, then suddenly, you know, BlackRock, BlackRock, I've got their ETF and now apparently wisdom, wisdom tree and Valkyrie ETFs as well. And then, you know, the news of the Schwab Fidelis, he sits at the L exchange and, you know, it just seems like they may have kind of, I don't know. I'm not saying they would have done anything nefarious and nudged the SEC into into kind of, you know, trying to create some coordinated fard, but I mean, it kind of seems that way, right? They've come out pretty well out of it. And I'm sure they've bought up here, you know, during during the dip and it's one of those things where it's like, we go, I know the pressure cells, the institutions are coming. Now they're here and you're like, ah, they're entering in this way. Maybe that's just a, maybe that is just a conspiracy. But it's, it's, there's good points and bad points. Why don't we say all the time that it kind of lends credence to crypto. So whilst you've got the kind of SEC saying it's unregulated and it's bad and you've got all these governments or random governments around the world, like the UK recently did the report and they were still saying it's all the farious in the UK like this. You know, it's used for drugs and illicit purposes. And then you've got the, you know, $11 trillion BlackRock, which is just, you know, a ball in with an ETF. It definitely shows that there's, there's something there. There's something with substance and the technology is being, you know, it's tried tested. It's, you know, 14 years old is it now? And, and, and it's, it's embedded in it's, you know, it's not worldwide yet. It hasn't spread as fast as say chat GPT that's that here 100 million users or whatever it was so quickly. But it's actually, it's being used and that's the main thing that Bitcoin needs is a user base and it needs businesses using it. And it also does need, unfortunately, the kind of seal of approval from the traditional finance system. Obviously, it could survive without it. But it's kind of, you know, it's kind of a positive thing that they're coming in in terms of affirming Bitcoin as a good technology. It has been quite a dip, Dan. And it was interesting to see how there was four knowledge on both sides. Some people knew about the SEC issue and they had sold Bitcoin beforehand. Whereas other people knew about this ETF filing and were right in position to buy that cell. So it really is interesting to see how, who has what information? And at some times you think that you know everything and you're going to corner the market. And then sometimes it completely turns around even a 20% swing in the price of Bitcoin. Well, Seymouth Cindy, what do you think about the BlackRock ETF filing and the subsequent price movement? Well, I hope you bought the dip. I bought the dip. I'm having my dinner right now and I certainly bought the dip to go with it. So I've enjoyed this very much, very tasty, tasty moment of being proven, like, right, I love the time. So yeah, this seems to have been a big market reversal change, momentum, change in sentiment. We are now double off the lows of the market cycle, right? We hit like a global low of $15,000, roughly. We are now at approximately $30,000. So that is already a 2x. And to use the around the 2x point from the bottom, that the kind of, let's say the normy finance world kind of wakes up and starts talking about this stuff again. The Bitcoin switch gets flipped in the media. And the Bitcoin is back and blah, blah, blah. That kind of new cycle of discourse starts. And we all know that the markets are kind of sentiment machines, right? So they are reflecting, you know, the public opinion, which is kind of driving a lot of the buying and selling, whether it's in real spot Bitcoin on crypto exchanges or whether it's in this kind of like paper, high-porthicated Bitcoin, financial instruments. So yeah, so this is the Bitcoin's back moment. And it is now like another round of institutional dismisses from all these big financial companies, like the Black Rocks and the Balkrees and whoever else. And as you've all said, it's been years in the making one of these spot, physical ETFs. But I wanted to just build on a few points that everyone else made so far. So we made the point that price matters and price matters in many ways with Bitcoin. And one of the most important ways is in terms of the network security. So we have to we must never forget that the price of Bitcoin matters because the reward to the miners is paid in Bitcoins and they need that money, that reward, to pay their bills, right? So the miners need specialized equipment. They need to use lots of energy to do the mining. And so the higher the price of Bitcoin, the more secure the network is. Harder it is to attack. And that is the core value proposition of Bitcoin. That tomorrow when we wake up, the ledger will be the same as it is today. So the coin balances that you and I have will be the same tomorrow as they are today. Because if they weren't, then this thing doesn't have any value really. And there are many coins that got attacked because they weren't worth enough and they got wrecked. My people did these 50 one set attacks. I used to do research projects on minority coins getting wrecked to try and understand the possible futures of Bitcoin after the inner situation where there wasn't enough reward for the miners to keep mining. So the price of Bitcoin really, really matters for network security. I wanted to say something. It's fine. If a smaller coin loses it and they get 51% attacked and they're embarrassed. But if Bitcoin got 51% attacked, if they lost it at some security point and got embarrassed, it could destroy the entire cryptocurrency market, the entire industry. Yeah. Because Bitcoin is the daddy. It was the first. It's the oldest. It's the most mature. It's the most valuable. And a lot of the architectural economic decisions that have been made by all the other projects in this space are built on top of the knowledge and the considerations that were put into place. Over these years with Bitcoin, Bitcoin is the most proven project out there by a country mile. I would still say that everything in this space is an experiment. The Bitcoin is by far the most mature experiment. I would say we've even seen Ethereum switch from a proof of work and from an inflationary model to a deflationary model where they're actually burning the Ethereum, which again, like you're saying copies what Bitcoin set up, what Satoshi set up originally. Which is really amazing. Like scarcity is a hell of a drug. Bitcoin is the first and most enduring example of cryptographically instantiated digital scarcity. It's sort of like Bitcoin is the first and the most mature and the oldest. And yeah, so as you say, if Bitcoin was to fail because the network security, like we couldn't pay the minds enough to secure the network, that would call into question everything into crypto space. And so you're not just proof of work coins, you would call everything into question. And just one last point about the SEC and regulation. There's been a lot of bluster, a lot of noise and like a few enforcements going on, various token projects being hauled over hot calls, being accused of being securities. Bitcoin is unaffected. And so I notice in the web through space, which is usually what crypto people call everything except Bitcoin, that's basically what Web through is. They're saying who orange-pilled Gary Gensler, who orange-pilled the SEC, Bitcoin has been treated as different as sweety-narrows to the other ones. Now we'll just say that five, six years ago, I was working on a regulatory philosophy project, taxonomy project called token space. You can look it up online. And in that, I used the lens of epistemology and taxonomy to try and distinguish the similarities and differences of various token projects. And for me, Bitcoin is like the perfect digital commodity. It's not yet a great money, but like it could get there. It's absolutely not at all a security. Everything else looks way more like a security than Bitcoin does. And the switch we talked about of Ethereum from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake makes Ethereum look more like a security than it was before. So there are some like dangers in making those kinds of architectural switches, especially in an uncertain regulatory environment. By the way, I used to work with Gary Gensler at a well-known US university. He read that paper. So some people are using me of wrecking Web 3. So you're welcome. That's great, great, Andy. It's interesting about the Ethereum switch. I like the way that they did proof-of-work at first, getting the tokens out to a lot of people, then switch to proof-of-stake. It seems like that might avoid the centralization that we always see with proof-of-stake. Of course, given enough time, I don't know, all proof-of-stake systems seem to centralize in the end. And as Rossine was saying about the price and it not just being about everyone getting rich, but it's about protecting the network, now I feel kind of noble, just a little bit, just a little bit noble. And I also have been to a Web 3 conference. It's just like a Bitcoin conference, except with money and women. It's totally different. Josh Tagalli, you know what time it is. It's the first issue it's time to predict against the Bitcoin predictor ball, the source of all truth and knowledge in Bitcoin. It predicts the price without the use of triangles. It's entirely circular and spherical in... Unheard of. Unheard of. And last week was absolutely spot-on. What'll it be, Josh? Higher or lower this time next week? I'm going to say higher. Dan, Eve, more optimism. We've got the Bitcoin ETF. As Chris Ellis always used to say, we have to wait for the news to go around the world at least once. Everyone has to hear the news. They have to hear the good news about BlackRock and others trying to make an ETF. What do you think, Dan? That's it. Not away! Well, I see, is it a sweep? Does everyone agree? The price goes higher, which is obviously a terrible sign. For me, one Bitcoin will always equal one Bitcoin. So the price will remain exactly the same, because the only sensible benchmark to measure the value of Bitcoin is against itself. So one Bitcoin is one Bitcoin, but we're all... We're all secure. We're all securing the network now. We're noble network secures. So will the price of Bitcoin be higher this time next week? Says it's very dark here. Pretty hazy. Reply hazy. Try again. Reply hazy. Try again. The ball doesn't always speak. So it's opting out this week. Moving on to issue two, EDX crypto exchange goes live, offering Bitcoin and Ether trading backed by Schwab and Fidelity. EDX markets first announced its launch plans for a non-custodial exchange in September about two months before the collapse of FTX. The announcement comes days after the BlackRock ETF launch, and they've also said they have a second funding round with new investors. What do you think about this new exchange launched by Schwab and Fidelity? Well, they're only focusing on four, and apart from Ethereum, which as we've said, it's now looking more and more like a security. They've only had the other three assets. Well, I saw two assets a bit... Well, it's obviously Bitcoin, but then Litecoin and Bitcoin Cash. Sadly not Bitcoin SV. Hmm. Oh, but it didn't even get... Oh, you've got a tiny little pump off the back of everything else that's really cute when that happens. Gives people some hope, but it's also very terrible. Poor people who sold their Bitcoin for SV. But forgetting about that, again, it's another kind of... I was kind of almost a slap in the face for not so much a slap in the coin base, but you know, because you could say that if you're listing Ethereum, Coinbase is listing Ethereum, then you know, they're a shitcoin casino. So, but it's interesting they are choosing to have an exchange that's not just Bitcoin, right? They're going down the multiple assets. Will they expand out? Eventually, will they have stuff like Monero, something like that? So other coins that were sort of launched that may not be considered as much securities as others out there. Will they eventually get tokens and expand out to securities? I don't know. How does that work? But again, it definitely lends credence, right? You've got, whilst people are losing faith in Coinbase and Binance, you've got these huge players for fidelity, sit at the, like, jumping into the market, don't, fidelity have like 1.3 trillion assets under management or something crazy like that. So again, it's, it's, it's, it let an ingredients to the fact that crypto is here to say. Obviously, Bitcoin's here to say, but actually that crypto is something that they're also they're also taking a punt on. So it's not just Bitcoin only for these guys. And running Bitcoin cash, that's kind of random actually. I think that was quite a surprising one because there's probably other things that, you know, I would have thought they'd choose over Bitcoin cash. They're also starting up a clearinghouse, right? Obviously, they're not going to be, you know, settling them themselves. They'll be using third parties. So I wonder if they'll end up using Coinbase, like Black Rockers for their ETF. Nobody knows. What do I know? But yeah, I think it's, again, it's definitely, it's gone. We've gone from, we've seen what we've gone from bare season to regulation season. And now we're creeping into institution season again. And maybe just maybe because of this is kind of a good timing just before the harvining, maybe we'll see the next slew of countries that are starting to declare Bitcoin as a national currency. You know, it will be a national currency season just in time for the bull run. So they won't get caught out a bit like, say, El Salvador did buying, buying so high. This is a good opportunity for countries to actually take the deep dive and start using Bitcoin. Well, it's interesting recently, Dan. I saw a fake economist cover on Twitter and had a big picture of Bitcoin. And it said the world reserve currency that we didn't see coming. And it's interesting to think about Brian Armstrong and all the advantages he had. He was in the right accelerator. He had the right backing. He had all this money. They went public on the stock market. Coinbase really had something going. And now we see out of everywhere, people attacking them. The SEC attacking them now Schwab and Fidelity working together to make their own exchange. The FTX was kind of an attack as well. And of course, Binance with its wild approach to international relations. The pioneers get killed and then here come the settlers. So it does seem like the big players are here. What do you think about their plans to have their own exchange, their own ETF? Well, all of our existing Bitcoin companies seem to be on fire. Yeah, there's actually related things. What you just mentioned, Thomas, which is a pioneers die with arrows in their back. And that implies that it's the settlers that... So maybe that's what's going on now. Maybe Coinbase was a sacrifice to the gods of the regulation. And they paid the ultimate price for doing a deal with the... Well, maybe we could call them the devil, maybe. But yeah, so I think it's always interesting to see these regulation first, could call it corporate compliant US-centred exchanges appearing. It's very interesting that it's non-costodial. I think that's a massive lesson learned from the last 10 years of crypto exchanges, holding your coins and then disappearing or whatever. Or like you're getting hacked. Like being massive 100 bucks and getting hacked. And yeah, I suppose, like as the article says, like FTX... Looks almost like a knee-juck reaction to FTX, the impression of FTX. So I think it's very interesting. I think the choice of assets is like, for me, it's not surprising. They're trying to play as safe as possible. And they've got like, regulators have come on record saying basically Bitcoin is cool, Ethereum's kind of cool. And Bitcoin cash, well, I mean, it was a fork, right? It was a network fork. It was not quite a copy and paste, let's say. But like it's... If Bitcoin's cool, then it's very likely that Bitcoin cash is also cool from regulatory perspective. And like Litecoin really was a copy and paste with a different history. And so it's a very, you know, nonsense coin. It doesn't do much. And like the only thing that I ever had suspicion, like regulatory sense about Litecoin was there was a guy. Like the Litecoin guy. And now there's not really a guy anymore. So that helps a lot when it doesn't look like there's a prominent figure that you rely on the efforts of in order to gain from your investment. And that's one of the kind of stipulations or one of the elements of the Howie test, which is how the US Securities and Regulation, Securities and Exchange Commission determines whether something like a stock or a security. And they're still using those logics in the crypto space with coins and with tokens. So yeah, I think that's, I think that's the rationale behind those using those projects. They tried to pick less controversial ones. The guess there is a bit question of whether they diversify into tokens and whatever. What I would say is I wouldn't be surprised if they go towards things that are obviously, like things that call themselves security tokens, like they say, yo, this is security, you're buying securities, regulated security, that's safe for them to do. That's an uncontroversial. But if you're when you get into this middle ground of like all the other web three stuff where we're kind of like, well, it looks like a dog and it barks like a dog and it smells like a dog. Is it a dog? And the regular is like, you have to find out and we might see you in five years time. We're not going to tell you if it's a dog or not. So that's the risk for all these exchanges. And like if you've seen if you've ever had an account or looked at some of these crypto exchanges that listed quite a lot of tokens, they've been delisting tokens left right and center over the years. Like some of these exchanges started with hundreds of tokens. They've ended up with like a handful now because it just got problematic. Holdings, facilitating trading and some of these things. So yeah, I think it's, they're playing it safe. This is kind of like blue chip corporate tactics. Like this is the big boys are actually arriving now. We thought they were arriving in 2017. That was like not the rival. This is the arrival. That was then kind of like staking territory, I guess, like staking it out and circling around it. But no, I think they're actually entering now. This is the big boys have arrived. Well, I guess we're glad to see them. I don't know. The limited offering reminds me of BTC dashy. So there's not a good feeling there. They used to have about five coins as well. And it's interesting like you say, what seem they seem to prefer copy and paste projects from Bitcoin. So it's too bad. We should have made one of those back in the day. Just copied and pasted Bitcoin. And I do love that quote I was searching for it. And the other one I like that similar is come home with your shield or on it from Sparta, of course. Josh, Shagall, you know all about exchanges. What do you think about the latest EDX from Schwab and Fidelity? Names you can trust. Yeah, old money, you know, this is the thing. The old money comes in and steals the thunder like the other panelists were saying. And it's very, very true. We saw that in the UK with the FCA, which is basically the SEC of the UK. Basically making a license but never granting one and telling people to withdraw their application before they reject them. But then the only people really getting the only companies really getting the licenses were big players in the market. Because I think the banks are finally gone. There's a bunch of money to be made here. And we'll take them in terms of security. It's this weird human made up, this is just made up language. It's a security, whatever that means. Well, we don't even know what that means anymore. And then the problem with security tokens is you put in too many barriers of entry, so it's never going to work. So you'd be like, oh, now I'm all above board as a whatever. I'm following all the rules in this one jurisdiction. Because if I have to follow all the rules, then I can't because jurisdictions have different rules that might go against each other. So if I follow this one, it doesn't follow that one anymore. And then it just becomes nonsense. And then let's say you're amazing and you follow all the jurisdictions, then your project will fail because no one wants none of the clients want to jump through so many hoops to get some weird token to be able to use the service that you're trying to build. So it'll fail fundamentally. Because the only way you will succeed is have as little friction as possible. This is why Amazon did so well because it was literally one click buy. That's how fickle the internet is. They don't want to spend the five seconds to put their credit card in to another website. They would just rather one click buy and it's done. So to make people that are potential users to jump through a million hoops and give KYC and pull down their pants and show their STDs and whatever else they need to do to get the token is ludicrous and it will never work. So yeah, it is what it is. But yeah, this new exchange, well, all money, welcome on board. I'm sure you'll have a great, fantastic time here in crypto land and you probably won't scam anybody. All right, let's move on to the exit question. Who wins old money or new money? Does Coinbase and other Bitcoin exchanges survive or will it be these new exchanges like EDX and BlackRock ETF and so forth? Dan Eve, who wins? I think Coinbase and KYC will survive. But I think they'll just get black dwarfs like in numbers by all the traditional institutions because what they'll do is they'll bring their existing customer bases. You know, that's just what it's like, what's going to happen? I think they'll just all get on board everyone. I'm like, use ours and use Coinbase. It's silly and then probably pressure the SEC into kind of putting out the fire that is Coinbase. But it will just about survive with them. Well, I see. Will this lead them to victory? Will they have their army of agents suddenly recommend 10% of your portfolio in Bitcoin? Now that we're selling it? 10% Thomas, that sounds like a tithe. It sounds like a church tax or something like that. I've been researching the Crusades recently, by the way. So like, I've got tides on my mind. I'm just looking at the stock price of Coinbase at the moment. And boy, that is a painful chart. So look at, glad I don't own any of that stock. It's down from a high of $300. And now it's like 300 euros. I'm looking at it in and it's somewhere around 55 at the moment. So it's down 80% last five years or so. I would like to call it two years or so. So yeah, I think I'm largely agree with Dan. But Coinbase is going to still be around. But these new players will open up new areas of the market. I don't know if the old areas of the market really come back to Coinbase in the way that they did in the last bull run. I think every time we see a market cycle turn again, we get echoes of the past, but it doesn't repeat. We always see a different flavor, different vibe, different set of behaviors, different set of participants and stakeholders, or at least they kind of proportioned differently. And as a kind of cautionary tale for what my lie had Coinbase, go take a look at the fortunes of some of the earliest cryptocurrency exchanges. We mentioned BTCE. There's an example. Let's go look at Bitrex. Let's go look at Cryptopia. Let's go look at the crackings of the world. And some of these are going a bit for next. They still go in, but they limp along on almost no volume. Like almost nobody, they're ghost towns these places. And that might be the future that Coinbase has. And I think that Coinbase is sort of saying itself up for a fight now with the regulators in America. That seems to be the way they're at least signaling in public. And I don't know if you're a compliant US corporation. I don't know what you think the end game of picking a fight with the regulators is. But I do know that Coinbase also spoke about opening an office in the UK recently. And so that might be the actual, the might in exit strategy or a backup plan there. And in the UK, since Brexit, since the UK left the European Union, there's been a big desire to be more like Singapore, which is kind of like, you know, was the independent place that's kind of a tax haven or a place where you can do regulatory arbitrage where rules are much looser. And that might be one of the reasons why Coinbase is interested in the UK, because it can operate in a more mis-sive environment than the United States is at present. And just to say again about city states, well, that's a bit like what the nice template is Alping Holy Land in the 12th century. In Ultrema, the principality of Odessa, the Kingdom of Jerusalem and in Antioch and Tyre and so on. So there's more than a few similarities between what the night's temple were doing and what's happening in the Web 3 cryptocurrency space, my opinion. And yeah, watch this space for a book that I'm writing about that. It all comes back again. And it is an interesting choice by Coinbase's lawyers to sue the regulators. Maybe not very often to get to say to your clients, let's go out in a blaze of glory, right? You know, you built this business. Let's set it on fire and see what happens. And likewise, seeing what's saying, it's interesting to see as we go through kind of these halving cycles of Bitcoin to see who's still there with us. And to go back to those early names of Bitcoin exchanges, I remember a bit instant. And it was a big deal. People would go to the red phone and they'd get their money out to Charlie Shrem and Charlie was even cooperating with the FBI trying to explain to them how Bitcoin worked, how money laundering worked and so forth. And as we all know, he got caught up in that with the Silk Road and some of his employees allegedly selling Bitcoin to the Silk Road and so forth. But it's interesting to see in the next halving cycle, will Binance still be with us? Will Coinbase still be with us? Will there be a different form, a different version? Will Coinbase look more like Binance? Josh, Ago, what do you think? The old money or the new money? Where are we going to be banking our Bitcoin in the future? Well, in the 80s, what was it the 90s? The Zigny Brazinski wanted Russia to have her Vietnam and basically orchestrated or pushed Russia to war with Afghanistan to weaken her. This radicalized the Moudemadeen over there and built these radicalized schools and then they ended up having all the way blown back if you believe the whole 911 stuff to cause that and then here we are. But I feel that it's a similar game in business where you get this Randian, this sort of Atlas Shrug Iron Rand style game where you get the old money using the regulators to basically control and destroy competition, ring fence them into a nice protected area and then make regulation so high that it becomes too much of a burden for startups to compete with. That's what I see happening in the major markets like the UK and the US. It's fairly obvious now that that's what's happening and I really hope that Bitcoin has stopped attacking Armstrong because there's this underbelly of hatred towards Coinbase. And while I understand it because you know they might have worked with the IRS or they might have given things across at the end of the day they've not had a major hack. They've been good actors in this space in terms of getting Bitcoin in the hands of consumers. They've made it easy. They've allowed for the widespread adoption. Sure they could have done things better. But right now they are the ones standing up and going to go up against the SEC and I don't believe this whole divide and conquer thing where at the end of the day they're Bitcoiners. They might not be the best Bitcoiners but they're out not the best Bitcoiners and we should really stand with Coinbase and help them get through this. And that's what I think. It does almost feel like we're saying that Coinbase, the early pioneers are going to be killed first and poor Brian Armstrong, a fellow shaved bald head man like myself is almost like Charlie Brown kicking at that football and Lucy keeps pulling it away. And like you're saying Josh they just use this existing system, the existing regulators and sure you know you thought Bitcoin was good and you were early and you hit all these things and tried to do it right. And at the end of the day the big exchanges come in and just take the money, take the market, take the money and run. We'll have to see what happens. For now moving on to the next issue. I had a lot of technical difficulties today but we're hanging in there. Check out worldcryptoneetwork.com. We've got the on this day feature on the left side. On this day in 2020 we had two shows about PayPal accepting Bitcoin and interview with Dominic Frisbee, Peter Todd, Dan Eve and more. In 2019 we were in Malta for the understanding Bitcoin conference talking to Oscar Geyser about his first computer. In 2017 the Bitcoin group number 147 talking about Segwit 2X and the Ethereum flash crash. Also reminding people on mad Bitcoin's that you're still early into Bitcoin coin based versus cryptocurrency and Amazon. In 2016 we had block talk with a Dow exploit. We also had a block talk quicky with a Dow explanation. In 2014 Chris before coffee day four. Many bits let's talk about Bitcoin. YT Cracker Bitcoin Baron live at Bitcoin in the Beltway. Jeffrey Tucker Bitcoin in the Beltway and Zou Tongued playing his song the end of Silk Road live at Bitcoin in the Beltway all from 2014. You can check out all these videos for free at worldcryptoneetwork.com. Moving on to issue three. The documentary Dirty Coin. A deep dive into Bitcoin's energy dynamics. At first it sounds very negative but it might be a good documentary about Bitcoin addressing the widespread misconceptions associated with Bitcoin and its reputation as a dirty coin. So perhaps it's just a bad title but it is an interesting new documentary. We also have a new documentary coming out of Canada addressing the mysterious origins at the center of finding Satoshi, a new documentary. They say they're going to look for Satoshi forever and they're probably going to make documentaries about it too. Wasima Cindy are you excited for either of these documentaries? Will they ever find Satoshi and which is more likely finding Satoshi or convincing people that Bitcoin is environmentally friendly? Well, so I haven't seen either of these films. I'm just going on what we've information we've got here in front of us. This idea of the coin being dirty or not dirty. I think this is a kind of a false binary. Bitcoin is just is. It requires a lot of energy to keep going. This is the way that proof of work maintains centralized consensus and it's network by manner. Is it the best possible way of doing it? We don't know. Is it optimally efficient? Well, some people have done studies on this. It's like AAL and colleagues and they suggested there's a paper called Just Enough Security for Cryptocurrencies from I think 2019-20 and they hypothesized that Bitcoin could have an adequate level of security using proof of work with a half energy that is being used now. That's like a theoretical study. It's not practical. One, to say. We also know that mining is permissionless. So that means anyone can plug in a machine that does charge 56 hashing and do the mining. So we can't know where it's being done. To an extent, we can know some things about the distribution and the location and the energy sources of the machines doing the mining. We can't really know all the details. We can't know what the energy sources are. We can't know what the externalities to the environment are of all of that. I would say that I'm kind of writing a book that proof of work at the moment as well. My take on it is a little bit more finer grain down. Is it clean? Is it good? Is it bad? I don't think moral arguments are that useful because they just set up polarities and then you can't really have a conversation if there's people on either side of that debate. So instead, try to think about cost and benefits. Think about the benefits of Bitcoin and think about the costs and then think about how they relatively balance and accrue and then make your own mind up about that. What I would say is that I've also written about Bitcoin being a time machine or a decentralized clock. So if you think about what happens every two weeks in the difficulty adjustment algorithm, there is a rebalancing of the probability of one individual proof of work, one individual cycle of the Shardy 56 computation, which you can think of like a lottery ticket, the probability of that lottery ticket winning the lottery of finding a block and you getting the reward. And that is done to keep the target into block time, the matter of time between blocks relatively constant. So the the big hack, the small hand of the Bitcoin clock ticks relatively constantly. But then the implication of that is that there isn't actually a satiety to Bitcoin in terms of energy. Bitcoin doesn't know. There is no enough to the amount of energy that Bitcoin can take. And so you can make an argument like we exist on earth in 2023 in a paradigm of energy scarcity. Like there is a finite amount of energy we are capturing mostly from the sand directly or indirectly. Whether you like it or not, that's the breaks. That's where we are now. And if Bitcoin has no upper limit to the amount of energy it can desire and it needs to secure it. And we as humans and other things that are living on the earth also need some energy to exist. Then you can see that there might be some kind of potential issue with that further down the line. And so like I would prefer to think more in terms of the end game of all of these things. Now of course the counter-agrid is always made, these arguments myself in the past. Green energy will Bitcoin incentivise the deployment of renewable energy that is the cheapest marginal source energy blah blah blah. And that's all well and good. But we do seem to be in a planetary moment where shit is hitting the fan in quite a lot of different ways. And so I see arguments that have added on both sides here. I don't think it is just create cost as one or the other. But I'm really interested to hear what you guys think. Well, I think one of the main keys that was seems to be there was about costs and benefits. When the media talks about this, they talk all about the environmental costs of Bitcoin. And they never talk about any of the benefits. So if we can at least regulate that argument to have a little bit more on the benefit side, I think that would help out a lot. Josh Tagalog, what do you think about this new documentary, Dirty Coin and the other documentary, Finding Satoshi? Satoshi Satoshi, the elusive one who shall. I don't know why people were so obsessed with finding them. It's just like the cares. Look at the code. Let's go. It's awesome. What he, she, they did really care. Honestly, that's so amazing that it doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. Anyway, I haven't seen them. I think it's one of those clickbait titles. Like, you know, someone that's right into some sort of diet might say, this ruined my life. If I knew this about this diet, I wouldn't have, and then you've watched the video and they're right into it. And it's just sort of a trick title. So I'm hoping that's the case with this, but yeah, I don't know. It's such, we've gone over it so many times that we, we as a society need to use more energy, not less, the more we use the better. We just need to find better ways of energy. And there are better ways of making energy. I mean, where's, and I've said it on the show over and over, there's infinite amount of energy underneath our feet. There's literally sitting on massive ball of lava. And there's so much heat. The Tesla was going on about the ionosphere. There's also, I mean, it's just ridiculous. There's zero point energy. I don't know. There's just all sorts of stuff we can go towards. The ridiculousness of the energy. And if you look at the miners, they're actually putting in a lot of effort, researching renewable and cheap energy. So actually, the Greens should be thanking Bitcoin for all the money that's flowing into R&D, into finding cheap renewables because actually the only way you can get dirty energy for Bitcoin at a cheap price is if the government subsidizing it. And if the government subsidizing it's usually in a socialist country or something that, and then when it subsidized, the government gets really angry when you're using a socialist country or Texas or Texas or Texas. And then they come in a rescue for using their energy for free. And so they don't like it. So it doesn't last long if you're a miner using subsidized coal energy or oil. It just doesn't work. So what works? Well, putting your miners next to a power station, next to a dam, next to a hydroelectric power plant. And there's even power plants using it to just grab energy at night when stuff's going down. And they don't want to throttle because it takes a lot of power to throttle. So they just store the energy in Bitcoin. This whole talk is just so boring. And I'm sick of people bringing it up over and over again. And it's like, it just makes zero sense to think that it's dirty. It's just, you know, there's so many things in our house that are constantly on shops that constantly have lights on. Well, they have lights on for security. There's street lights. We have street lights when there's no one in the street. Why? Because you should have them because there might be one person walking in there that could be killed if we don't have them. Is that a waste of energy now? Should we turn off all street lights in the world because maybe, you know, a few people get killed? Of course, we should. It's ridiculous to say we shouldn't. Anyway, it is interesting. Josh had only took one cycle of the Texas paying people to not mind Bitcoin, essentially paying people not to work before they started to get upset about it. And realized they're like, Hey, we're, we have to pay a large subsidy to have these Bitcoin miners balance out our energy grid because they have to pay them when they're not mining. And it just drives people crazy like paying farmers not to farm. In the same way, I think the media can't stand it that we don't know who Satoshi is. They say, Okay, you've got this great new invention Bitcoin. Okay, well, who's Thomas Edison? You know, who's Tesla? Who's Elon Musk or Zuckerberg? Right? We need to get them up here. Get them on the interview. Explain why you created Bitcoin. Explain your background, your history. Oh, we need to understand you. And Satoshi has denied us of that. We can only grasp at the background of who or what Satoshi was. People say it's a woman. They say it's a team of people. They say it's a lone genius or a space alien. All of those are equally valid. We have no evidence beyond really. I mean, a little bit here and there, Josh, but you know, it's we don't know like who made this thing. And that tries to meet it nuts. And actually, when BlackRock and these other people are like, we're going to put our money in and we're going to build all these services for Bitcoin. And like, what that thing invented by nobody? Well, I think the biggest thing that they're looking for is to be able to attack that person. Because if that when that person comes out, they're obviously going to be a fallible and imperfect human. But as an enigma, they can be perfect, you know, because we don't know all the dodgy shit that that human thought. We don't know what they wanted. We all, well, all we know is the the postings on Bitcoin talk forum. But, you know, apart from that, there's nothing to pick on. Well, and we don't get to play our favorite game in the media where we build someone up and then we tear them down. You know, you're a great artist. You're amazing. And then, boop, you're Michael Jackson, you're abusing children. Like we go, we go right up the thing and right down the thing. And with Satoshi, we don't seem to be able to grasp onto him, her, they, them, it, whatever it may be. So I think it's going to keep driving the media crazy. And I think we're going to see a lot more documentaries about this exit question. Which one do you prefer? If you had to see a documentary saying the theater or in the comfort of your home, well, I see in which one would you go see? Would you see Dirty Coin or would you see Finding Satoshi? I would go to the Dirty Coin one. I think the finding Satoshi, honestly, the best thing that happened, the best thing that ever happened to Bitcoin was Satoshi Disappearing 12 years ago. That was the best thing that ever happened to Bitcoin. And as Josh said, if Satoshi was still around, then it would just be bad news for whoever that, whatever person, group of people, machine intelligence is hyper-dimensional aliens from the future, it doesn't matter who or what they are, they would be having a bad time. So it's great that they disappeared or died or whatever stopped caring, just went away. So I would watch the Dirty Coin one because there might actually be some kind of nuance there. Whereas this kind of, you know, by now, the identity of Satoshi is probably the biggest mystery on the internet. And so this is why we see all this kind of like clickbait rumor mill junk all the time. And you're not going to learn anything from that. If you want to know who the candidates for Satoshi are, that information is already out in the open. You know, we know some of these people. And so you can find that out without watching this stupid jump. Oh, I don't know. You're putting right into my point there. I know some of these people. That's why I'd watch the Finding Satoshi movie. I want to be like, oh, they interviewed tone or Jameson or, oh, they're featuring Adam back. You know, we had dinner with him once. So that's, that's the one I would watch. But just based on that, Josh Shagalla, what would you watch Dirty Coin or Finding Satoshi? Uh, Dirty Coin. Josh has chosen very serious Netflix selection there. Dan Eve, Dirty Coin or Finding Satoshi is pretty much going all towards Dirty Coin right now. Well, I skipped the main question. I'm just on the exit question. But I just want to say on the energy thing, right? Like how, how they, you know, I remember one of the, one of the articles was said that, that, you know, I think it was about the mining, their ones putting Texas and they're like, they're taking advantage of the energy system. And like real good comment was, no, they're using the energy system, just like any other business pays for access to that energy system. But that's, that's literally how the whole business goes. So what do you get? You start campaigning and say, businesses should be shut. They're not all about electricity. This, this business is not about electricity, but this isn't. It's just, it's just kind of crazy. Um, and, you know, the fact is that wasted energy really is energy that's from renewables that's literally going to nothing. Well, because it's not being used in some way. So why not ship, you know, Bitcoin miners out there to actually take advantage of the wasted wasted excess energy? Let alone the methane, like, flaming their doing. What's the word? What's the flaring? Flaring, that's it, flaming. Flaming. Flaming. From a fracking wells. Yeah, yeah. So why not make use of that? And then just instead of, you know, letting methane out as the atmosphere actually use it to, to, to, to, to, for something good for financial gain, which then can be used to put more R and D's just said into finding better renewable sources of energy and other, and other energy, you know, like, fusion, which seems like every, every, every five minutes, there's an article about how it's just around the corner. But yeah, it's, you know, we're going to have like, we're going to have license fears and all that crap soon. So nobody's really going to care about that giant space sales with all of that, all of that, fiddley stuff. Interesting point for us to think about. Here's one for you, Dan, maybe the others, okay, which is when we get nuclear fusion, when we get license fears or space sales, they're not going to be equally distributed around the world. Are they? We know that. That technology is going to be in the hands of a small group of people or a country or something like that. And they will be able to extract an asymmetric advantage in all kinds of places, but including Bitcoin. So what does that mean for the security of the network? If one group of people have way more energy than others, because my other theory that Bitcoin is vulnerable in terms of security as the power lines change, the energy generation power lines change. Both the chips and the energy, right? Because if you just have energy, you don't have necessarily Bitcoin miners, but you need that, the China system, the foundry, you would need ever increasing chips to take over Bitcoin as well. So it would be a combination of the two. Yeah, well, when you've got your nano, nano bots building the license here around the sun, you'll have them also working on building a fabrication, like in space, fabrication plan in space. So you will, you know, one person who holds the energy will hold everything, but there'll be a bit of a space race right to it. There may even be by that time, there'll be cooperation, there'll be actually countries like going, hey, we're building a license here, whatever, you know, let's all just cooperate and share it, rather than like my license here, that sort of thing. So hopefully, hopefully everyone will be all like love and love and fairies and a big disaster if say the aliens crash landed or perhaps worked with one government, if they chose a winner, say it raw as well or somewhere else and started giving them technology from the future to be slowly released over time, making that country the economic leader of the world. That would be a very big surprise. Josh, Shagall, what do you think about this topic? No, well, not much. I think at the end of the day, we need more energy. We should be using more energy, none of this Earth Day nonsense because what a true Earth Day is using more energy, honestly, we just, this whole ridiculous fast that we're, we're using too much energy, it's crazy, it's crazy. When people used to die of toxic shock by having smoke from fires in their houses and instead of a nice clean lab, ridiculous. Well, we're certainly not going to get to space conserving energy. It takes so much energy to break through the atmosphere to get to space and all of that. And as well as Josh is saying now, if we've got enough energy and we've got Dyson spheres and all this stuff, I can take a shower as long as I want. There we go, true victory. And I said, energy, not water, Thomas, not water. Oh, figure out. It's just bad. We have enough energy, you have enough water, too, because there's plenty of water that you just need to decelerate. And ice, the true sign of all civilization ice. Let's move on to issue four. Honk, if you love Bitcoin, Bitcoin lightning takes the wheel of a European rally car adventure with a comically loud horn, a candy machine, and a jukebox filled with Mozart, metal and more, it's the Bitcoin ambassadors rally car adventure. And you got to see the car here. What a story. It sounds like they're going across Germany competing in these rally races, convincing their campground owners to take Bitcoin. And a lot of it reminds me of this show. They have a candy machine that accepts Bitcoin, just like Ben built. They have an interactive jukebox that you can pay to play songs remotely. They've got a horn that you can turn off and on. It's a mobile Bitcoin lightning rally adventure. Dan Eve, what do you think about the incredible Bitcoin ambassadors rally car? It's pretty cool, right? They didn't, like, 8,000, 8,000 miles. I'm surprised that they don't have some sort of, look, we could have a Bitcoin miner, like, like, somehow in the car, right? Mining as they're doing it. And running off of maybe maybe some solar panel or something like that. I don't know. And it's pretty cool. I like the idea of the of the lightning powered. What was it? The jukebox and the first thing I thought was, I wonder if they've got Rick Astley, because I'm going to, I'm going to just rickroll them the entire time. But yeah, they have they have been rickrolled many times already. What else was the lightning switch to the horns? Pretty cool. So that's that's kind of nice, a nice little kind of quake way of going and talking to people about that Bitcoin meeting, you know, people on the road and all these different places doing this huge tour and just, you know, I kind of like the the the the Mormons right doing the door to door. They're just they're going from pitstop to pitstop, you know, preaching the word of Satoshi. So I like it. I wanted to do much the same thing back in the day. So once again, the great thing about the internet is any idea that you have someone else has it too. And now someone else is acting on it. So I don't have to do anything. It's great for me. I see him. What do you think about this? They've got lightning. You can pay him. You can you can honk the horn. Everything. I mean, it's a cute project. As to like the difference is going to make like to, you know, eight billion people that live on this planet and what they need. I don't know. It seems like the driving most of the route is through the Nordic countries, which are already like a little bit leaning towards the sorts of ideological positions that would be well suited to Bitcoin. We know there's also Bitcoin miners, Bitcoin users, supporters in those Nordic countries. So I do wonder if they're a little bit preaching to the choir here. Like I don't know if they're really changing that many people's minds. But it sounds cool. Like, you know, who would you want to go on a road trip in the summer through northern Europe? Like it's quite nice. See these pictures looks looks pretty cool. Like yeah, I think it's fun. I'm nice for them. Cool story, bro, et cetera. And as to the real change it's going to make. I don't know. It's an Andreas Antonopoulos level of bringinus down there. But it's still fun and pretty. Doesn't it's two good things. Josh, Gala, what do you think about the rally racer for Bitcoin lightning? Man, it reminds me of the old days. The old days where we used to celebrate lots of people like it reminds me of who they Austin and Becky from life on Bitcoin. I don't know if you remember those guys. And they traveled around the world spending all their precious Bitcoin to spread the word. And I think they must have blown past 1000 Bitcoin over the days and you think, oh, Paul Austin and Becky. But yeah, it's that sort of flavor of the old days. And I kind of miss those days where we all as a group celebrated every new shop that accept the Bitcoin. And it'd be cool with lightning if we if the Bitcoin community was a little bit more sort of celebratory of new things that people invent on lightning. Instead, they just sort of assume and the only thing that gets celebrated is like Blackrock doing something with Bitcoin or something like that. Where it's like, no, like, you know, someone just made an ATM and you can, you know, move the claw and pick out some candy with three lightning like that's the fun stuff. That's the cool stuff. And we should be celebrating that a little bit more than these behemoth old money nonsense coming into this space. I agree, Josh. It is like the old days. It's nice to have a nice fun story every once in a while. And we have a bonus story today moving on to issue five. The IMF capitulates on Bitcoin bands. Says they're not effective, which is what we've been saying on this show for years. The IMF suggests that countries consider not banning crypto. As previously, they were recommending it. However, this news has not spread to Argentina where they're attempting to ban crypto. Was seeing what do you think of this major change in the same time that we've seen the investment community, BlackRock, Videlity, Citadel, all these other companies coming into Bitcoin. We now see the IMF and the international community with the exception of Argentina, perhaps accepting Bitcoin as well. Are we just winning on all fronts now? Well, I mean, we've been saying, like people in the Bitcoin community have been calling Bitcoin things like free speech money as long as this network has been around. So you can't stop it. Can't regulate the network into submission. You can regulate the entry points and the companies and the legal entities that deal with these things that you can't stop the thing. It's an unstopped wall force. And so like it's interesting to see the IMF, like the international monetary fund, the kind of whatever final boss of final bosses of regulated global financial capitalism. Realising this, take it a minute, we've been saying it for a very long time. And I would just make a point about Argentina, which is that Argentina is a basket case economy with rapidly devaluing currency and very, very high inflation. And so the reason, no, you know, if you think about that, hold that in your mind, then think about why they might be really against Bitcoin. Well, this is like a possible candidate for hyperbictchoyization, or at least for Bitcoin to be more attractive in the minds of the citizens of that country than the currency they have now. And just a little note on Argentina, I went there 2015-ish, I think. And I was in Buenos Aires. I brought dollars from Uruguay. And there was a situation where the government had set an exchange rate between dollars and the Argentinian pesos, but the black market was offering double the exchange rate. Twice as many pesos for your dollar. So you would walk down Ca Florida, one of the main streets in Buenos Aires. People would just be shouting out, can we or can we? Which means change in Spanish. And you would go and do black market transactions, not me, of course, but like other, I saw other people doing this. Do black market transactions to get Argentinian pesos at this 50% discount, compared to the central bank rate. And indeed, you would see there were boats between Uruguay and Argentina, from colonial Uruguay to Buenos Aires. You would see Argentinians go over to Uruguay to use the ATMs to get dollars out, which you couldn't do at the ATM in Argentina, to go back to where they live to take advantage of this black market rate. And the way you could tell Uruguayans for the Argentinians is that Uruguayans as a nation are addicted to urban marty. So they would carry a thermos under their shoulders, whereas the Argentinians didn't. So you could, I mean, like, generally speaking, you could tell almost to a man or a woman if they were Uruguayan or Argentinian. And it was very much like a little run that they were doing to do this regulatory arbitrage because of the basket case economy and the high inflation in Argentina. And Argentina is a country that elected a right wing market reformist government. And they drank the IMF Kool-A, drank the World Bank Kool-A, took your restructuring of debt and loans and all of that, like market liberalization, all that stuff that neoliberal world order governments want you to do. And the economy is absolutely screwed as a result of it. So that's why Argentina doesn't want to play nice because I think the Bitcoin is a valid competitor to their failing and traditional French week. And it's been working out so well, so far as well. It's interesting, both Brian Arsrong and Argentina both trying to do what you think would be the right thing, following the regulators, following the large groups. And it ends out not working for them. Dan, Josh Aghalla, what do you think? The IMF is suddenly on our side. You can't ban crypto. Yeah, it's quite interesting. It's an interesting thing because if I remember correctly, they were also warning El Salvador against what they did, but maybe they're not going all out and recommending that countries switched to Bitcoin. But maybe, you know, after that, El Salvador, that currency fell a long time ago as well. Like that's a different situation. Yeah. Yeah. But we have like, you know, this thing called the stride and the fact. And really, if you ban something, then people get all, especially if it's a ridiculous ban. So then people start talking about it. The other thing that I think that the IMF might see, and I'm not sure if you didn't share the article up front, but banning crypto is starting to become so, it's like banning AI, right? It's something that's just impossible to do. You can't do it because it's so broad. What is crypto? Well, it's a thing that can be held on a ledger, like what defines decentralization, even the Bitcoin, it's kind of say what that means. It's a scale, it's a, this doesn't mean now that games aren't allowed to sell in-game items. Oh, they are because it's a centralized server? Oh, no, they're not because there's three servers blocks, you know, hashing a string of blocks together. Is that now illegal? It just becomes a headache for any regulator, for anything, really. And it just becomes a game of whack-a-mull. So embrace it. And on top of that, you get that, the problem that the red flag act had in the UK with the regulators banning, well, basically not banning cars, but making it so ridiculously hard to own a car that the UK fell so far behind the car industry of the world that they, finally when they were reversed these ridiculous regulations, they came up and they took years to catch up to the Ford Motor Company and the Germans that were making motorcars and just fear-to-head. So I think the INF might be a little bit frightened to say in years to come when the countries that ignore their advice are booming because they actually accept a Bitcoin and the countries that follow the INF's advice might be totally wrecked because they weren't allowing their citizenry to actually hold some of these red digital assets. And so maybe they're future thinking and not wanting to look ridiculous like Peter Schiff does. As Nicholas Klein said at a convention of the amalgamated clothing workers of America in 1918, first they ignore you, then they ridicule you, and then they attack you and want to burn you, and then they build monuments to you. Dan, although this quote's often spoken by Gandhi, who didn't say it, are we at one of those later points? Are they going to build monuments to us soon? Well, I wonder, a certain part of me does wonder whether the capitulation was sponsored by BlackRock and some arm twisting because BlackRock's not going to go into something that the IMF's like heavily against or the I, or shall I say the IMF isn't going to go into something that's the biggest asset managed on Earth is in for. So that probably had a bit to do with it. I've got a really great with Josh, they like you can't ban it and therefore you're just going to end up with like if someone puts a rule down that they're unable to enforce, then they just look silly. And then an old man's to look like an idiot who can't enforce rules properly, right? You know, there's, it's again, it's just the whack-a-wallow thing. It's the multi-headed ninja snake. You could chop a bit off, but then you know, they'll start growing again and you know, it's, you just can't stop Bitcoin and the decentralization is the reason for that. The miners get banned somewhere, they move somewhere else. It's just this cycle where it just gets, you know, gets knocked down slightly and then rebuilt stronger elsewhere, where the laws are more acceptance. So I do like the way they did kind of say in the report that crypto offered protection against macroeconomic uncertainty. So they're kind of saying that actually that that kind of eludes to the fact that it's a hedge against inflation without actually saying that, right? Also that if the buzzwords have promoted financial inclusion, which is something that we have always talked about, right? The Bitcoin opens up, it's free and open access and it means that anyone can use it. You don't need a bank account that someone's going to shut you down because they don't agree with your, you know, your identification, you think crazy like that. And it also acknowledging it's saying faster payments among other benefits. So, you know, lightning is, it just completely poops on visa and master cards. So, you know, here we are. We've got these ancient systems that you bit with us around the world and they just can't compete with the new technology. So that's something that's really, really reassuring. But the one thing that was crazy from that report was, or the article was, it said, well, they also saw in CBDCs was a way to promote resilience in communities vulnerable to natural disasters. What does that even mean? How can, how can crypto help them against like a volcano? Obviously, they can use the power of the volcano or like a tsunami like, oh no, like the tsunami has come. Maybe they're, maybe they're referring to this. Obviously, there's the, the old adage that, you know, that you lose your keys or your private keys on a lot. They're yacht, right? I dropped my, my ledger off the side of the boat. So a tsunami would help, you know, give you the excuse that you lost your ledger. So maybe that's the way that it helps communities vulnerable to natural disasters. The picture behind me is actually a reenactment of people losing their private keys. The great tax exodus. Well, and as they said on South Park, money cures AIDS. So maybe you can fight tsunamis with cash. It just hasn't been tried yet. You could also nuke tsunamis, tornadoes, other kinds of activities can be stopped with nuclear weapons. We have one more bonus issue breaking at the time of the show. Really quick, guys. Belgium has ordered Binance to cease crypto services in the country. Is this beginning of a new wave where they start to ban Binance? Josh Shagalla. Yeah, again, this is, this is regulators basically kicking out the startups, kicking out the trailblazers. And I bet you, I bet you anything that some bank in Belgium will start allowing people to buy crypto on their service. So this is how it goes. Yeah, we mentioned it early in the show. And I bet you bottom dollar that's what it is. First, they ban you, then they copy your services. It sounds like Apple. Ben, Eve, what do you think? Is everybody going to ban Binance now? It definitely seems like it's open season for Binance. Didn't they recently also withdraw out of the Netherlands and France? Maybe that's a sign that there have been some goings on inside the company that they're trying to really scale back very, very rapidly because they know that they might get caught out. Maybe some other crazy leaks like that. Like, yo bro, we were done on rice and security exchange. So maybe they're just, you know, they're just batting down the hatches and trying to weather the storm, right? And say pull out until they can get the licenses that they need. But yeah, I still have faith. I don't think they're completely bad. I think they've tried to be good. Obviously, they've tried to evade regulation. But isn't that what Bitcoin is like to all along? Like, yeah, you know, it's a vague regulation. And then Binance does it and they're like, oh, yeah, Binance. So I don't know. I only think I hope that they're not bad actors and and that they do actually survive. Because again, another, I just don't want to see the whole industry get completely, you know, washed out by all the traditional players, you know, Coinbase goes, Binance goes, and then you just have the old boring black rock and fidelity and all the other old school companies that just basically wipe the floor using the regulators. It still feels strange this whole time with Binance. It's like, aren't you the pirate king? No, I'm not the pirate king, but you've got a pirate hat and you got a peg leg and you're missing an arm and you got a hook for an arm. I'm not the pirate king. And we just keep passing this around and more and more. It's like Belgium, Bands, Netherlands, Bands, they have no physical location. And there might be sued or criminally sued by the SEC in the future, allegedly. Well, I see him. What do you think? This pirate play keeps going on. We keep chasing Binance around until they become BTC-Dashi. Well, I read an interesting book recently, posthumously released book by the social anthropologist David Graber. We wrote an excellent book about debt and he wrote a book about the pirate enlightenment where he was talking about would be pirate utopias, like, you know, lawless kind of libertarian paradise system was set up in various different parts of the world. And I do wonder if like something like that would probably be quite handy for Binance right now, a place where they could actually set up home and apply their trade. The William Gibson books, he often talks of Brazil as a data haven. And a place where you can do anything you want on the internet. And maybe it's not Brazil, but another country like that would be really convenient for Binance or a similar company to have right now. Yeah, absolutely. We'll just say one note about Belgium. Belgium, like the capital, Belgium is Brussels. And Brussels is where most of the bureaucracy of the European Union is located. And so this is kind of like it's very much a country that is run by bureaucracy and bureaucrats. And so it doesn't surprise me that the slightest that there is a regular heavy regulatory hand in Belgium. But I mean, as we've said, that they're also following the lead of other European countries. So it seems to me like it's a core data action to squeeze Binance out of the European Union. And you know, like the game of Wacomold that Dan was talking about earlier, Binance will live to fight another day. Might get a bit battered and bruised, but like they'll sell their pirate ship somewhere. Or a corset. They're not pirates, they're corsets, barberry corsets, not pirates, corsets, which I'm also researching from my book, by the way. And so yeah, so I think that they'll pop up somewhere else in a different location, different jurisdiction. I do wonder, like, you know, because you've got nation states now that obviously they pro Bitcoin. I do wonder if those will be the logical safe havens for these companies in the future. And like, you know, the names of some of those like the paraguise, the El Salvador's, you know, some of these type tropical islands, the St. Kitsis, the Navisys, the Solomon Islands, and so on. So I do wonder if these will be the safe havens, the decentralized safe havens for the new wave of regulatory, or the avoidance of the or the exit from the game, playing the game with regulatory back them all. Yeah, I mean, it's always as a big coin business owner. It's one of these things that you've always got to have plan B or plan C or plan D on the table that you cannot just settle down. You have to, so even if you go to one of these places, you have to be prepared to move the operation if it becomes hostile. And because for anyone to be a politician, you actually have to be a bully. That's what you are. You're a bully. And yeah, you might be a bully that, you know, resonates with you right now, but you're telling that bully to act in a certain way and force them to act in a certain way. And so you've always got to stay on the ball. And that's just how it's worked up till now. And I don't see any change. I mean, we see that with Brian Armstrong having to do with the SEC. You see that with a lot of crypto projects. You see that with XRP who tried to play ball also get hammered and slammed. So yeah, it's, you know, I'm actually in absolute wonder how CZ has managed to stay so large for so long. I don't understand how it works. I don't get it. It confuses the hell out of me. But, you know, he's still there. Things that are apparently safe food. It has been interesting, Josh, to see it all happen and in slow motion. And as was seamless saying, all you have to do to stop being a pirate is change the name. They call him Sir Walter Rally. Now he's a captain, not a pirate. And I thought for sure was him and say, he's going to be, you know, in Belgium, they have very fine chocolates. All right. I think we're running out of time. Let's move on to predictions or story of the week. Josh, Shagalla, are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? Go ahead. Yeah, my prediction is that we are going to see some sort of regulatory sort of guidance maybe because they can't just keep smashing coin base and all that. So I think now with BlackRock coming in, we might see some clarity in the space and the clarity will say quite frankly, well, it's almost impossible to operate here unless you've got a big $1,000,000 to buy the license and we're only giving away three of them. So, and that will then lock in the old money and tada, the old trickers happened. Dan Eave, prediction or a story of the week. Go ahead. I predicted that IMF, but they've been breached now and they will eventually become Bitcoin shields. The tides have turned and they'll be like, game, say Panama, have you thought about adopting Bitcoin as you're not going to see? One day, one day. Oh, by the way, I've, where next week on Monday, you can start testing the standard IO interface. So it'll be really interesting to get your feedback, lock up some assets, borrow some SRO, pay it back. It's all test net coins, but it's just fun and give us some feedback. Cool. Very cool and check it out at the standard.io. Oh, I see, Mel Cindy, do you have a prediction or a story of the week? Go ahead. It's a bit of both actually. I think that all of this kind of regulatory wave is going on. All these institutions coming in. This is all going to be very good for Bitcoin. So as distinct from other coins tokens, cryptocurrencies, I think, yeah. So the way the Bitcoin functions, the way they was designed, the way it's architected, and the way it behaves, will give it a massive advantage in this new, more regulated environment that we seem to be existing in and going into. So these are all very good things for Bitcoin. So Bitcoin was always the move slow, don't break things, philosophy. And when it seemed like we were in the Wild West, that wasn't the optimal strategy. We saw all these other coins come and take the other networks, come and take the line like with their flashy claims and their snappy designs. But now, I think, this is now the Bitcoin's time to shine. It's coming back. All right, positive news for exchange. My story of the week is don't let children touch your electronics. I have these buttons that let me play sounds on my board. And recently a friend of mine's kid came over and pushed all the buttons on the board. And can you break it? Yes. Yes, you can break it. It seems like my board is dying on average every 10 to 15 minutes. It completely breaks. And I reset it. And I'm afraid to touch it in general. So don't let children touch your electronic devices. That's my story of the week. If I get a new board, I'm going to get like a cover for it. I'm going to put like a sheet on top of it. So people don't think, oh, that's a, that's a fun button pushing game. And it's really like a board that I use to make the show. So that's my, you know, technical advice for the week. There you go. So thanks again to everybody for joining us. Be sure to give us a thumbs up down below. Leave us a comment. Hello to the chat. Sorry. We changed YouTube's. Must be one of those mercury rising weeks or whatever it is. Everything's going wrong. So it's the summer solstice. It's a summer solstice. It's always in a lot, you know, stars are affecting us as a Shakespeare said. But we're running out of time until next time.