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, Dan Eave, the crypto raptor. Bonjour-no. Josh Tagala from thestander.io. Top of the evening. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network. Moving on to issue one. Issue one, Fed's new instant payment system could be trouble for PayPal and Benmo. The Fed's goal is to collect and connect 9,000 financial institutions nationwide. Yes, the US Federal Reserve officially launched Fed now, a new system rolling out to 35 early adopting banks and credit unions for the processing of instant payments between financial institutions. The Fed's goal is to eventually connect more than 9,000 banks and credit with unions nationwide tossing out the old payment system and supporter of faster payment processing for all US institutions. Dan Eave, what do you think about the Federal Reserve's new system that may challenge PayPal, Benmo, and maybe even Bitcoin? Fed now doesn't actually sound a lot cooler than WorldCoin. That's for sure. Obviously they're two different things. But the traditional banking system has got to innovate and stay alive and stay relevant. I don't think it's going to be any, it's not real, obviously, it's not competition for Bitcoin, probably more impact on like stablecoins. But it could put I think pressure on the regulators to if Fed now sort of makes payments a lot more kind of slimline, then the regulators could get a bit more strict with Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. But also the other thing is that I suppose if Fed now comes out and is actually coin-inja, then it could spark more innovation within Bitcoin to kind of keep up with the fact that they could end up turning around and go, well, Fed now settles instantly whereas Bitcoin takes 10 minutes. Then that becomes this kind of tech war between the Fed now and Bitcoin so to improve, could end up proving to transact speed and scalability. The other thing is about the behavioral and stuff like that. They've steadily been growing in user-based. However, they are going to be impacted by this by a far much faster way of transacting between banks. Banks are getting a lot better at doing these kind of services. In the UK, you've got pay-by-text message, pay-by-this, pay-by-that, and it kind of cuts out some of the need of actually using a service like PayPal, especially as they've brought down their fees, I think. But at least for certain users, but it's still probably a bigger threat to PayPal than it is to Bitcoin and stuff. If they end up, we haven't talked about the architecture of what they're using. Are they going to actually end up using a blockchain to make sure that things are settled, solving the double spend problem? Because that's what we've got in all these other current financial institutions. You've still got potential for double spend problems. Are they going to use a blockchain to counter that? They haven't really gone into that much level of detail. But yeah, I don't see this. Definitely not a threat to Bitcoin. It's more of a threat to all the kind of Venmo's, PayPal's, and all these other ones. They're just going to have just as much control over your bank accounts. That's why you should stick to Labit to coin. Josh Shagall, it seems one by one we're losing all of our Bitcoin talking points. We used to say, you could pay with your phone. Now, I use Apple Pay to pay with my phone. We used to bag on the Swift system and say, oh, it takes so long to settle money when you send money between your bank accounts. Now, the Federal Reserve is looking to fix that. Will this affect Bitcoin? Look, the thing is that Bitcoin was produced for many reasons. One of the main reasons that a lot of people forget about is to fight against infinite money supply. The fact that there is only 21 million takes away the power to debase the money supply, basically ruining what you put your whole life's work into something to save. This day can just destroy those savings by printing more. This is one thing that Fed now can't take. Now, the other thing to mention here, that this is an extremely dangerous thing. What I don't like is that there's no conversation in mainstream media about if they should even do this. There's no sort of talk by government to say should they do this? Because when your bank right now does a transaction, when you pay someone at the shop, your shop bank and your bank basically have an IOU. So your bank might have a thousand IOUs to bank B, equivalent, let's say a million dollars, and bank B might have 200,000 going to bank A. And at the end of the day, those amounts go up to the Fed right now to get settled in one single transaction. And the Fed goes, okay, UO bank B, just 800 K because they owe you 200. So you owe them a million, they owe you 200. So you just have to send 800. So it's one transaction, everything's done. Now, what happens here is that the Fed don't know what made up those millions. And the Fed need, the government would need to go through court and get subpoenas and all sorts of stuff to really find out everybody's single transactions or it just is not possible, especially with privacy laws and this and that and the other. Now, there's due process involved. With Fed now, the Fed gets an eyesight into every single transaction down to the cent through what's going where and being settled in real time. This is extremely, extremely dangerous because the next step to this is, oh, hey, there's another lockdown and you can't spend money after 15 minutes or we want to make a 15 minute city, you can't spend, oh, there's an obesity epidemic, you've had your ration of sugar this month or the government has been used, you're not allowed to eat another steak, you're only allowed one a week or whatever it is. Whether you believe like those things or not, what matters is that we have due process in place and not give governments that much control because maybe you like the government that bans beef because of global warming or whatever your political leaning is, but the next government that might come along might not like people with blue eyes or whatever. So the whole point is to always restrict power, especially when it comes to money because money is the end game of power. Money controls the whole game and if that's the kingpin and they control that kingpin about every single transaction, it's extremely dangerous. And Fed now, they aren't even discussing that, they're just saying, oh, look, it's an upgrade, it's beautiful. And now you get real time. Well, we already have real time by the way with their mobile paper, nothing new, we already have mobile payments, we don't get anything better from this, but they get something better, they get infinite control. So I don't see where the outrage is from Americans and there should be, but there's not not even from the right. And nothing from the left, obviously. So I just don't understand why that is. And it's quite interesting to me to see that there's just no outrage. As you know, Josh, the Federal Reserve is just about as federal as federal express, right? We don't really have control of it. The United States has the ability to appoint the director of the board, not much else. So even if the people were interested in it, it's not like there's going to be a vote for this one way or the other even at a proposition system or nationally in the Senate or the president or anything like that. So it's an interesting banking system that we have here in the US. It's amazing. And one of the main things about is even the smaller institutions are up in arms about this. I mean, basically what's happening here right now is a coup from taking all power from all banks into one private bank, the Federal Reserve. And these are outrageous. It's outrageous that it's not getting talked about. It's just weird. Rather than talking about UFOs, and maybe that's why they're bringing up the whole UFO thing right now. Just to sort of, hey, look over here, everyone, because obviously this is a new, I mean, everyone knows that. It's just logical. There's just too much space out there. But all of a sudden, why now? Why release it now? What's the big anyway? There's something up. What else I think is interesting about this, Josh? It kind of reminds me of when Apple comes in and takes out these third-party applications, PayPal, Venmo. These are massive businesses that exist on payments, as well as Visa and MasterCard. In a way, this kind of threatens them as well. If you just use your bank now and you go through Fed now, you don't use any of these systems, it's strange that there'd be so kind of anti-competitive, right? Obviously the Fed is going to be cheaper, going to be more accepted. It's going to be very difficult to think about a Discover Card or AMEX, or one of these smaller payment systems. It's very strange to see them just openly crush their business in an Apple manner. Yeah, and sorry, Dan, I just want to quickly add, while it's there, is that in another Apple way, they're just not calling it CBDC. Just like Apple don't call it VR, they call it Apple Vision Pro, or they don't call it HD screen, or whatever they call it, or retina. They just rebranded Fed now. They never even mention CBDC, but actually, in the back end, it has to be a mini internal blockchain, because otherwise there's one big honeypot. If they get hacked, it's an extreme risk of what Satoshi sold was the ability to start all that data in a way that's secure, where they can hack even if it's three computers next to each other, at least there's a change just next to each other in internal blockchain. I love the idea of them if they didn't use a blockchain. It reminds me of a change chip back in the day. Everyone's up in arms, you're like, this isn't Bitcoin. They have a database, they have an Excel spreadsheet, it's a huge risk to everyone because of how complex it'll get, and how out of control get quickly. If they don't have that infrastructure, if they don't have that blockchain, this could be a real, Cathcating disaster, where all of your money gets sent to random addresses, and you just have no idea what happened to your funds. To Satoshi's point about how he knows, it's hitting the smaller players, and that's because the biggest players are the banks are much bigger than the smaller players, those payment processes that sit over the top. They're probably the most embedded within all the politics, all the shoulder, just shoulder backhand stuff. They're the ones that are going to be the most paid up and intertwined in all the lobbying. They probably have the power. I can see it's being a federation, some sort of federated side chain, but if some sort of federation of signers, each bank becomes a signer, and perhaps they end up, there's a number of nodes, each bank is a node, something crazy like that. I don't think it'll even be that. I think it'll literally be three servers sitting probably in the same room, signing one after the other, so that a hacker would have to hack all three servers, which is better than one. Surely they would learn from Bitcoin's positives of Bitcoin that decentralization to a certain extent is going to provide some of that additional. It doesn't scale fast enough. No, but not even having a full-dent decentralization, I'm talking about having a federation of signers rather than... Yeah. Well, if you're power hungry, what do you want to do? Do you want to give power away to a bunch of people, a different federation? No, you want to control that power. Why would you do that? Obviously, you would do it for security reasons. That would be the major reason, but what you're giving away for that security, which is paramount actually, because once there's one breach, the whole thing is screwed. But if that for that security, they're giving away power, which means, hey, we want to change this. I upgrade this and one bank says no. Or the banks get together and say no. Actually, you've taken all that business. Now, none of the transactions are going through us. They're all going through you. So we're kind of... I don't know, sabotage this or whatever. Yeah, federation would take the power out of the fed, and that's what they want. The reason why they're doing this is for power. Well, and as Josh said, they can't fix that there's a limited number of Bitcoin and an unlimited number of dollars, as the man said, there's an infinite amount of cash at the Federal Reserve. Let's move on to the exit question predicting against the travel eight ball, which is very difficult to see. So I'll be using a light here. Will the price of Bitcoin be higher or lower this time next week? Dan Eve. I'm on a fit now, down. I think it's going to be slightly lower. Josh Shigala. Think it'll be up, up, up, as World Coin starts getting promoted every freaking way. The Stan Molyne. World Coin 2. But we'll talk about that more later. It's a show full of scary power crabs, as we've said, as Josh has said. Here we go asking the magic eight ball. Will the price of Bitcoin be higher this time next week? There's a lot of bubbles. It's very hard to see. Most likely, most likely, the ball has spoken. So it's looking good for next week. Moving on to issue two. Issue two. Crypto wrapper, razzle con, husband, reach plea deal over Bitfinex hacked laundry. The couple was accused of laundering billions of dollars of cryptocurrency stolen from the 2016 virtual exchange currency exchange Bitfinex have entered into a plea agreement. Still no details on if they are the hackers themselves or how they ended up with the billions of dollars of money to launder, which they did in in-artful ways like buying play stations at Walmart and other nonsense. Josh Shigala, what do you think about razzle con? The wrapper who's like gangus con with a little bit of razzle and her husband who laundered this money and now are going down for it. It seems to me there's obviously missing some hackers here. But we'll see. Well, gangus con had spread his DNA everywhere. Apparently most people in China now have some gangus con jing or something like that. But yeah, I kind of wish our internal wrapper here. The crypto raster would have gotten some of these gains. To me, the whole story is so perplexing. It's so perplexing because these two just are total clowns. Like total clowns, but I don't believe that some big mafia stole money and gave it to them to to launder. Like, who does that? Why would you do that? You would you just wouldn't. You would figure that out somehow. You'd get an internal person in. You wouldn't give it so weird. I think that's the plot of a movie, Josh. Like the person's supposed to show up at the shop, but they give the wrong person the suitcase full of money. And then these two crazy kids go out there and they've got millions, if not billions of dollars and no plan to launder it. This Walmart plan is a terrible plan. And we need to know like was it was the hacker there next door neighbor? Was it a friend from college? They met him at a road stop somewhere like millions of dollars. And this is just down. It's disastrous. It's bizarre. I think what happened was he was a little bit clever. He was mucky around with like some sort of, you know, hacking tools on Linux and found some vulnerability, took it, went what the hell now. And then, you know, she just started living the high life. And then they got busted, like because Bitcoin's extremely traceable. So I don't know, the whole story is so weird and it's a great one to follow. I love it. Now, one day remember the previous guy who was hiding his millions of dollars in like a Cheetos tin underneath the house, he discovered a bug in Mt. Gox, which is so simple. It's hardly a bug. And I don't think it was hacking. He just pushed withdrawal like it does in times or something. And he's, I pushed withdrawal. He got more coins. So he just kept kind of running the coins through him back. And then the exploit stopped and he had all this money. So maybe these razzle con and lichtenstein are the same thing. They figured out how to push the refresh button at the right time and ended up with a billion dollars, which again, the story in itself that we really need to hear. And if we're going to get a plea deal, I want to know who the hacker is. I want to know, or if they don't know anything, I want to know what they don't know. I want to know the whole. No, I absolutely agree with you. That is exactly what happened. They found some weird exploit and just went, oh, wow, and refresh because these people are daft. I mean, he has a little bit of technology. So maybe he's a little bit deeper and had to run up a version of hacking linux, which is like designed to like pen test. But we, a story, love it. Want to hear more. It's strange. What I would like to see though is that Biffin X sort of screwed over there, uses a little bit because what they did for those that don't know, they tokenized the losses back then. And they said, okay, he has a token which represents your lost Bitcoin. And we'll pay you back by asking running the exchange, the profits that we make will pay our individence. This was all before you're not asking SEC or anything like that, which I think is totally cool. I thought it was really awful what they did actually because those better than my gocks, what we got is still nothing, basically nothing, just constant lawyers pumping away all the creditors' funds for the years. At least Biffin X was like, let's think outside the box that's issue with token and pay it back. And they did, right? But what happened was that Bitcoin tank, like credit, no, they're token tank like crazy when Bitcoin tanked. And then they bought their tokens back, they bought their tokens back from all these creditors for pennies on the dollar when the market crashed and you know when the market crashed when it's read everything's read, right? So was they token. And then when they bought it back, Bitcoin started going back up, they're debt-free, yeah, everyone, like you can't fight because you got actually the token and you signed away your rights for anything in the future. So now that they've found the money, they're like, well, you've already been paid back in these tokens that actually just tanked and we bought back for pennies on the dollar. So it's a weird story, definitely film material. I would love to see the same guy that made the big short run this storm. It is an incredible story, Josh, of Biffin X printing the tokens and coming out ahead most of their customers coming out behind. And I agree it was the wild, wild west and they decided a different way to do it than Mt. Gox. And it seems so far like it's worked out. Dan, Eve, what do you think about Razzle Khan soon to be wrapping from prison and this bizarre, bizarre story? Well, you know, it was back then it was what, $77 million I think they said. So it wasn't the three billion it was today and what, four and a half billion when they actually got caught with it. So the story that they were kind of given it to Launder seems like fractionally more believable. But yeah, I'm leaning towards, well, you guys have said that they found some sort of minor export in the website. Maybe he's got some hacking skills behind him. Maybe he just did something that had just accidentally kept on, you know, the cash machine, he just kept on spilling out and he just kept on withdrawing that sort of thing. But the whole story about how they got caught like ordering pizzas and and and and and play stations and stuff like that. It's just insane, especially when you can use all sorts of mixes to do this stuff rather, you know, the there's so many services you can go cross chain, you could switch from, you know, use services like like change now and stuff like that to go from one chain to another altogether and and it just seems strikingly weird how they had all this money underneath them and they weren't able to kind of, yeah, keep keep themselves kind of out of the public eye. You can't, man. You can't with that much money, you can never hide it because you're gonna screw it up. You're gonna screw it up. Basically, it is funny how it's it's similar to the Cheetos guy where he had all this money, but he couldn't spend it. They had all this money. They're not buying lambo, they're not buying expensive apartments, buying play stations and pizza. It's such a idiot. I mean, you know, if you find an exploit that that companies like Bitfiniq are willing to pay you a good amount of money, that enough to like life-changing money, instead they were just greedy, which meant they couldn't spend any of it and once they did, they got busted and now they're spending their time in prison, instead they could have been white hat hackers, got paid a nice big ransom and I'm not ransom like bounty and gave most of the 99% of the money back, kept a couple of mill and would be loved life, like it's stupid. These are clowns, really. Yes, it's strange. I think they do seem like a proper comedy duo. I certainly wouldn't put them in charge of trying to launder like, well, not three billion, let alone, sorry, 77 million, let alone, obviously, three billion. But obviously the price of Bitcoin just exploded after they were given it. So maybe, you know, you would have thought that the person who even gave them the money would have like to launder if it wasn't actually them who did it would be, you know, trying to do them more research themselves on how they could kind of help launder this money or, you know, it just seems like it's, it's crazy. I think it's got to be them who actually did the initial hack, but whether there'll be any evidence for it, you won't find that. And also the plea deal, like what are they, you know, what's good, what's going to come out of the plea deal? Are they going to have some information? Maybe it could be something even more crazy, like it was an insider at Bitfiniq, who kind of helped fork the money out to them and that's part of the plea deal. You know, the other, the other crazy part of the story is, and this is all speculation. So, you know, please don't sue me Bitfiniq, because it's not real, it's just my thoughts. But you could, you know, they also brought out Teather. And so they could effectively print as much Teather as they want, stay that they have that money in the bank and buy actual Bitcoin back with it. So, when they, you know, the thing with Teather is that we've gone full circle, we've gone, yeah, let's decentralize the power. Yeah, Bitcoin, 21 million. And then, oh, yeah, we got this thing called Teather now, which is like, oh, we can, you know, print as much as we want and say we have that. Like, and everyone's like, yeah, yeah, yeah, it's like, guys, if you're in crypto, yeah, there's lambo's and moons. But there's also the original philosophy of freedom and accountability and money, programmability and money, all that stuff is nice. But the fact of the matter is always bring it back to first principles. We need scarce, infinitely divisible, guess currency. And this is what we have with Bitcoin. And it's beautiful. They also brought loads of, they have loads of gold, right, that they, that they found excavated in California, like some sort of treasure, some sort of treasure hunt, fed treasure hunt. But what I found interesting about this is that they said they've, they're seeking to have the couple forfeit the assets, which includes gold excavated in California. So by the term seeking to have them forfeit the assets, does that mean that they still don't actually have hold of the Bitcoin? They just think that they've got, you know, it kind of money the water a bit the way it reported on, they were applying to forfeit the Bitcoin, like it wasn't in their possession yet, the authorities. But isn't it? You've got to figure as part of the plea deal, they have to give up the money. Yeah, they haven't already then they're, you know, holding it back and they'll say, okay, yeah, yeah, you know, less years, here's the money. Imagine Josh, if they'd have, if they'd have bought the used that Bitcoin to buy gold from Etoro, they'd have sent some Etoro. Old Tore, oh god. Yeah, and been good, would've been good, but they would have been busted too. But yeah, you know, crazy story, want to see if it's on. Hit the thumbs up everybody. Yeah, thumbs up down below, continuing the show while we're on tour in Europe. And it also reminds me Josh of this great Ron Howard movie, The Paper and Marissa Tomey says, these guys lost 77 million dollars of the mob's money. Dumb fellas. Dumb fellas. So exit question, I think you guys are all going to agree here, but are these actually the hackers? Did they find some exploit and hack it themselves? Or do we still have a very exciting shadowy figure out there who hacked Bitfinex? Josh, a gole, what do you think? Yeah. Dan, you do agree, are they the hackers? Yeah, I think they are. I think you can call them hackers, or as you said, like, you know, accidental kind of exploit as like, yeah, I think that's it. I'm still holding up or script to do a shit. Yeah, or I still think there'd be a shadowy hacker behind this. Or like, I think Josh had said, someone perhaps allegedly we have no information on this inside of Bitfinex helping them do this. There's usually an inside man, maybe part of the plea deal that give that guy up or that woman or whoever it is, or maybe the shadowy hacker. Maybe they don't even know. It's a fascinating story. I agree with Josh. I want to see the movie. Let's move on. Check out worldcryptonetwork.com. We've got brand new interviews with Lad Costa and Peter Todd, as well as the recent Bitcoin group episodes and much more at worldcryptonetwork.com. All the episodes are free with no ads. Just click right on them and they start at worldcryptonetwork.com or on YouTube. Issue three, worldcoin two, let's make sure we get the two in there, could enable a wider distribution of crypto than even Bitcoin. Boy, taking the press release right there and putting it in the headline, CoinDesk, really taking some risks there. Let's go over to this science and tech from ArtNet News, nefarious data collection, masking as public art, and AI company has placed mirrored spears around the world in a massive eye scanning project. Worldcoin two's effort has been criticized by the likes of Edward Snowden who tweeted, don't catalog eyeballs. Of course, worldcoin claims, worldcoin two claims that the iris scanner will throw out the iris scanning information, making a hash from that, and then keeping the hash, I think Snowden and other smart people on Twitter have said instantly, then you could use the hash to master the iris later when you catch them like a criminal or whatever. You could match them right up. The bounty for giving up your eyeballs is I think one worldcoin, so our worldcoin two. So if you think that's going to be worth a Bitcoin, maybe you're getting 20,000, 30,000. And of course, we all know in the past that there was a worldcoin, WDC, and that it's now listed on dead coins out here at 99 Bitcoin has inactive development inactive Twitter low volume and not listed on exchanges. But if you check it out here out on coin market cap, it still has a market cap of around $2 million. My brother was saying this is one of the top 10 blockchains longest running blockchains. It's worth a 0.0152 cents. This was the original world coin for whatever reason. Sam Altman, the creator of OpenAI, has decided, among other things that he can just take the name of an old coin. So mega coin, fast coin, all the Bitcoin two, you better watch out. They're just going to take your name. Dan Eve, what do you think of world coin and their fascinating new eyeball scanning orb? Well, the first thing about is it just, it, world coin sounds scammy. It just sounds like it's not one coin. It just, it just sounds like one coin, world coin is like a, you know, almost think that word coin in something now is just such a ripoff of Bitcoin. It's, you know, a perfect age coin. They get a pass because it's a funny dog. But they could have chosen something that's a bit more original. To their statement that, you know, it could enable a wider distribution of crypto than Bitcoin. Now, they could be onto something there. But I'm not saying it's any, in any way, comparable or good or anything like Bitcoin, because you know, this is just literally a token on like what OP, the Ethereum layer to. But it's going to, it's rolling out. Yeah, they, they started off on polygon, but they switched to optimism. Right. There you go. So it's not optimism, right? And the fact is that it's got this kind of feel to it, though, it's got the one coin feel, right? It's got this, although it's not MLM, it just feels that way, you know, they've obviously got this, this sort of, you know, community raving about it and this huge sort of building of community where they've got hundreds of thousands of people skewing up around the world right now to get their irises, scan. There is, you know, I can imagine it, it's going to have a wide net of users. And because of the fact that, you know, if chat, chat, I mean, this was actually what 2021, 2021, I think they did the funding for this. So it was actually before chat, GPT was kind of known to the open world. But the chat, GPT's got a hundred million users right now, right? So you can see how fast these these things can spread. And if you're giving people, you know, tokens for, for scanning their irises, a lot of people who haven't sort of been open to the idea of privacy being preserved, are quite happy to go and just scan their irises like, like, lambs to the slaughter, and to give their data away. And as Snowden pointed out, you know, they may destroy your data, but they have a hash of your data, which is your data. Like that's the thing, isn't it? And so someone has access to your data, that's the, that's the longer the short, but you can muddle words, but, um, and say that you destroyed the actual, uh, the actual thing, but they know that it's your data, because when they scan your iris again, they can tell that it's you, because they've got the hash of it. Um, what, what would have been called, it cut to a certain extent, right? Is if maybe they use the Lightning network or something, which has probably got a hundred times more scalability, than, than say, OP and use this Bitcoin, but they actually went for a kind of, you know, that the, the, the token route, which is a bit, uh, a bit kind of sad, the tokenomics on it are awful as well. Jeez, I mean, like, they've given themselves, themselves a valuation of like, a total distribution valuation right now, like, it's like 22 billion or something, you know, imagine just being able to theorize something out of thin air and just say that, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the total value is going to be two, you know, maybe 400 million now, whatever it is, even that's, you know, really high, but it's going to be 22 billion, you know, the total supply. And it's got the, hang on, hang on, no, the initial, it says in the white paper, initial total supply is 10 billion. So they can just release more. Yeah. Well, it sounds like that's, they haven't gone into details about how they're going to do this AI powered, um, UBI, right? So maybe that's actually part of it. The AI powered UBI is just an infinite inflation. So once they've hit the distribution of the full distribution, which is sounding like it's mainly going to, you know, investors anyway, but once they've hit the full distribute, people like Sandbank and free, for example, and free capital. So you know, it's a real good, solid investors behind it. Um, they are just going to keep, they're going to fund this UBI by just printing more of of this world coin, well, well, coin, geez, I can't even say it without laughing. Yeah. So, and these, you know, the devices, when you think about how scary this is, you know, it's a 6.2 pound biometric imaging devices custom built to verify humanism in a secure way. Passes by and you don't need gaze into its mirrored surface. And it will, it will scan their retina and take their biometrics. Now the scary thing about that is that it's so small and portable that it could literally be like, they could put it behind like a mirror, right? Or something like that where, you know, they could put it behind mirrors in toilets and scan the, the irises of everyone who goes to the toilet, right? You know, this could be, there could be a lot of hidden ways as how they're collecting this information. And I'm not saying that maybe they wouldn't, I'm not saying that they would do it as a company specifically. But then other people might get hold of these orbs. And if it becomes some sort of scheme where you can scan people's retinas and you get commission, wild coin commission for helping scan people, then that can be abused and just used all the furiously. I did see a video of, I think, was it cryptography, who, I don't know if you got invited to the offices, but basically stolen a world coin orban destroyed it, which was, that seemed pretty cool. But the other, the good side of a certain part of this, this, this sounds like it's got good nature to it. Like the fact that they're using this identity to combat AI deep fakes and things like that. You know, we've often talked about how, how fast AI is advancing and how hard it's going to be to tell the difference between, you know, fake Donald Trump playing like World of Warcraft or whatever that's been simulated and actual Donald Trump, you know, and indeed anyone else, so protecting your own identity. So, you know, one argument for this that they're saying is to protect your own identity by giving us your identity, which seems a bit freaky in a way, because it's, yeah, it's, yeah, okay, to me, it just sounds crazy, but it's obviously ticketing people's gizzards and they're all lining up to get their irises gone. Welcome to 2023, it's been a crazy few years, isn't it? I'm really surprised it's not Facebook or Apple or one of the social networks going after it. We've talked about it before, how, as an idea, the internet with its wide openness, not being based on real names, not being tied to an identity allows for this kind of hacking and bad behavior and all these things. And if we start it over again, maybe we do it differently, have a different architecture, but I'm also just kind of struck and I'm sure Josh is going to be by the idea that, like Dan said, you could put these things in the open and they're saying they're having them in public places now as the other article said, not the coin desk article. And that you, as a normal person, doesn't have a lot of information, look through this thing for a minute and they could steal your identity. It's almost as bad as like if you then talk to it and then it took a picture of you and then it could make a total copy of you and, you know, your trip to the market becomes this AI black mirror nightmare where like things get worse and worse for you after you got your iris to scan and it takes 10 seconds. You know, it's this 10 seconds to destroy your life forever, theoretically, or it's fine and it's just a really great service. But like Dan was talking about and I instantly thought I was like, what a sweet database to hack. Once you get all those uh, hashes of everybody's eyeballs and their names, you just wait for it to come up again in the next iris scanning system or you sell that database to someone else or it leaks on the internet and everybody can download it like the Mt. Gox data was on pirate bay for a while. Yeah, it's just very scary. It's the kind of thing you can't roll back, you can't fix once you give up your biometric data as noted and others have said. And I'm of course reminded by the great cartoon strip soon to be a TV show called Strange Planet and they're the kind of these aliens and they try to understand earth and this one says, transport me to the orb match and usually when they say orb, they mean ball and they're talking here about take me out to the ball game. So it's just a funny use of the word orb, trying to make some kind of really horrifying sci-fi thing sound like nothing. Josh, what do you think people are out there on the street? Should they give up their iris scans to get the free world coin? But if it's as big as Bitcoin, everybody could use one year 30k, right? This is the thing that actually the chat just stole my talking point, funnily enough, because I was singing the exact same thing. The trouble is all these eventually, first I'll take the iris, then I'll take the space, then that will get stolen, now we can't use the face, we need to use a hand or we need to use a thumb thing, and then that gets stolen. The last thing you'll have left is every time you want a bank account, I'll excuse me, scan your button, oh yeah, I'll just leave it, I'm going to bank account, here you go, all right, yeah, that's you Josh, yeah, okay, got you, and then that will be stolen too by the porn industry. So it's ridiculous, we're setting ourselves up here, we cannot let our biometrics be stolen, like be taken bit by bit like this, it's really, really hot, but someone brought it up to me yesterday, because I was complaining about it, and they're like, well, have you given your KYC to other exchanges? And I'm like, yeah, I kind of had, yeah, you know, and he was right, you know, and it was like too shame, because there's just something creepy about putting your iris into this ball, and it's not just your iris by the way, for them to attach the iris to you or the hash to they need obviously your name and your address and your details, so that also is in there, what does that get hashed, no, because they need, they need some data, and so it's a really exercise. And once they have all that Josh, they can buy the rest of your information from Amazon, from the voter databases, from all the other various things that we've talked about, how politicians now have access to an incredible amount of demographic information about you, target knows that your daughter's pregnant before you do, and let's throw into that, we now have your iris scan, scan creepy out there. Oh yeah, and so the thing is that there is a problem coming up, and knowing that someone is human online is a problem, but they don't even solve that, because I can just go onto optimism and buy some world coin now, so I can actually use this silly world coin without my identity, so I don't quite understand where this is going, maybe the check can tell me, can I not send that if I haven't registered, do I need a special wallet, like how is it all is a smart contract wallet? So presumably if they had a service like a world coin Facebook, you wouldn't be able to log in without your iris scan, I don't know how that works with money and the blockchain, but if I had your iris scan, that's what I would do, I would use it for logins and things. Well, as Jack said, they think they're using zero knowledge proof, so apparently they're not, you're not kind of giving your core data, you're just, I don't know, I'm not sure how it works, you just get like a wallet that's attached to your eyes or something, you know, private key is at your eyes, but then we've got the same old issue of like what happens if you lose your private key, like yeah, yeah, and if anyone's done, if anyone's done the economics on these like UBI, you see straight away that it doesn't work because the inflation is ridiculous on them, you get destroyed every week, there's a destruction of values so far beyond anything you believe, and we saw a simple version of this during the pandemic when governments around the world gave just 1,300 bucks to every single person, and we're seeing the fallout of that now with massive price hikes and everything because they literally printed trillions of dollars for the first time to do this. Now, if you did that every week, well, you just basically wouldn't have any value left, it would just be destroyed. So the economics of a foul and not thought out, the idea is done, look, there is some simple good thinking behind this, and that is who the heck is human on Lion anymore? Because, well, we far surpass the touring test, in fact, AI needs to dumb itself down to pass the touring test now because you can tell it's AI because it's just two damn clever. So now, like we're at the point of we do, if we need to do business, it's so easy to get scammed. So we've opened a fricking Pandora's box for these LLMs. Like, the world is changing massively quickly, like just ridiculously fast, and old people already can't keep up. I can barely keep up. The young might be able to be probably not. I just think that there is a problem to be solved here, but I don't know if it's solvable through this sort of iriscanning or biometrics. I think it's solvable purely through some of the cipher punk original ideas, which was trust ring of trust sort of thing where you start to build a reputation behind an avatar. And if that avatar is compromised, then you can kill it and start a new one, but it's not your flesh and butter, your remove, one removed. So people can't steal you, or they can do a steal the avatar. And this is the only way we can really do this. This whole thing and VBIs, I think it's a fast, it's not well understood, it's not well explained, it's just lazy intellectual laziness from the left and intellectual laziness from the right saying that there's always going to be jobs. I think there isn't going to always be jobs where we're heading towards a very, very fast as well, joblessness. And something needs to be thought of, but UBI definitely isn't the answer. And neither is Worldcoin. And not only that, Worldcoin will be absolutely volatile. I mean, we're the standard world. Maybe if we get to begin a volume, we can allow it to be used as collateral and people can borrow then S euro, euro S or your or USDS or one of these stables or even something picked a goal. But in and of itself, Worldcoin, I don't see how it's possibly used and why not use light coin or Bitcoin or anything else. I don't understand. Well, are we going to see, are we going to see this, well, we're maybe not with Worldcoin, but with with with Iris like, Remratt and the scanning, right? Was it was it minority report? Very ended up, you have to change his like eyeballs. We'll see like, you know, that's I think he's my alright. I think he had a fake, yeah, he had fake eyeballs or contact lenses. And then of course, in demolition man, they've destroyed the iris scan. The guy just pulls out his eye and he has it on a scalpel and he pulls it out. The other head doesn't he? Incredible. So the iris scanning, still even that doesn't seem like it's going to be the most secure because you could effectively maybe not change your life. Sure you could. The whole scanning, you know, at least you've got a cover across there naturally. Right. And again, back to Varnigate, he drew the picture in the book of the asshole, the starfish, he called it. And like Josh is saying, they are very unique and very scannable like the retina. I want to talk a little bit about how this is Sam Altman. And that this is I don't know very much about the guy that he created or is behind open AI, which is chat GPT. And I don't know that we really trust chat GPT or how it was built in the same way that mid-journey was built by kind of stealing all these art projects and then putting them together into this AI, chat GPT was built by stealing I assume I don't know. All of the information on the web similar to Google downloading it and searching for those deep links in the early days. But this guy is credibility is that he's downloaded the internet, reorganized it into chat GPT, which is a very useful tool. But I don't know if that leads to I want him to have my irises or I want him to do on my bank. Josh, what do you think about this being the chat GPT guy and then we'll go back to Dan. Yeah, you know, Sam Altman, he's also behind why combinator he was the CEO over there for a what long time. He's a clever, he's a clever lack. But this to me, like just the name like Dan said, it's just brings him down and that's it, not for me. Like this is like snakes and letters sort of, yeah, yeah, he's climbed all these letters. He's smashed on a snake right now and he's sliding all the way back to block one with me. I don't know, it's just a weirdest thing. Yeah, I don't know. I think Sam's a very clever guy. I think be wary because wherever there's cleverness, like him releasing chat GPT opened a lot of interest, especially amongst the elite whoever the fact that is. But a lot of very, very powerful people, including globalists, including all these sort of web types are all in his ear right now, all wanting him. And you know, if for him to now go around scanning everyone's eyeballs as well as having the wealth of everybody's information. And you know, that being the API for everybody's phone to replace Siri and to become your personal assistant and everything that people have been you and like it's been used a lot. Everyone I talk today all using it in the business now. So all that data, it's not going up there and being used as a once-off thing. It's getting sucked into the beast. So the guy is pulling a lot of data. He knows the value of data. And so yeah, I think this being Sam Altman, I think the only person that I would trust less is probably Bill Gates. But it's yeah, wow, I don't know. I'm just totally suspect. Yeah, it's not just business data either. And I'll certainly say I'm guilty of this. You can ask chat GPT any kind of question about your personal life, about what's going on in your human body, about how your mind or your brain is feeling, if you're nervous or anxious or in a hurry or whatever you ask at that. And then I hope there won't be repercussions later when they print out my whole chat log. I imagine it's like everyone else's chat log. But that is very much tons of great data, not just business, but also personal. Go ahead, Dan. They don't even, they don't even need to print it out. They just asked chat GPT for all the dirt on you. Yeah. And didn't they find there was leaking of data as well between, I'm sure I read about companies that where they'd they'd somehow stumbled upon other companies data. And I think I even found this recently with a task I gave it, which was translating, for example, some terms and conditions. And there were, for example, 14 points in these terms and conditions. And it gave me another like five or six on pop that weren't included. So it was kind of, it basically, it'd take an extra information from somewhere and didn't just straight translate. It was giving me more information than I initially put in. Whether that was leaked from like another perhaps another site that was doing a similar thing. I don't know, but it's gone kind of, I think it's actually gone a bit of GPT 4's actually gone a little bit down here over the last few months. It seems to get a lot more confused. I don't know if you've noticed that. I'd be more strict with my prompts and stuff. And it goes off tangent and we'll just start making stuff up. And there's a paper that's come out of starting to stand for it or somewhere that said that it's become worse over time in simple math and stuff like that. Yeah, it just seems like you've got to keep on, you've literally got to keep on ushering it back onto the track like continuously. It just, it started off kind of, you know, really, really easily finding that you've done your task, you're completely tasked. And now it just deviate continuously. And you've got to send it back to deviate and you've got to keep on sort of prodding it almost and look, it's worse than my wife. It always wants the last word. No, it's okay. No, okay. I will every time the last word has to be. But yeah, the thing about Oldman is why he's seems like a fascinating character. But it seems almost sinister now. The fact that you hear he was behind like, you know, he was behind, was it why combinator and then, and then, you know, and then GPT3, I've just like GPT chat or OpenAR. And now this world coin where they're scanning your irises, it seems to me like there's too many things that are into links almost like, you know, you, you, whilst these global services sound great, they're also leave you open to the worst pot, you know, the most detrimental attack in terms of hacking your data right. And if someone has that much of your data, they've got your chat GPT data, your iris data, your spending data, all of this like, you know, the more data you give one entity, the more vulnerable you are. So it's, yeah, he's obviously getting himself about. And the fact that this was done two years ago, right, it was 2021 that he did the initial funding for this. Yeah, well, can I add something little here? This is some historical perspective for everybody. Now, the reason BitConnect got so big was because Bitcoin forked to Bitcoin cat. And at that time, we didn't know what ticker was going to be, was it going to be a BTC or a BTC was it going to be BCC or BCH? And there was all this speculation. And people saw this BCC coin way down in the market cap like 3000 or something. They said, that's going to be it, but that was BitConnect. And so BitConnect started pumping. And they're like, what's this coin that's pumping are big connected. And then that got promoted to all hell. So that's how it got bit. It got big because people confused it with the new fork of Bitcoin cash. So what I'm saying here, and this is not financial advice, but but a lot of people will think that the old world coin, which is probably trading somewhere, is the new world coin. And maybe holding a little bit of that might go up. You shilling world coins. No, I'm just saying, I'm just saying the stupidity of the crowds, fucking up the wrong ticker symbol and buying the wrong thing is probably inevitable. Yeah, don't come any from xt.com. I don't know what that is. It is strange that they'd reuse a name from the past. And remember Josh, during the coin cash debacle, they actually wanted BTC. They wanted the name Bitcoin. They wanted the ticker symbol BTC. They wanted the whole thing. They wanted to be Bitcoin. So exit question. Does world coin, and I'll stop calling it world coin too, even though I think does. Does world coin have lay or critical of the orb or critical of it here? We were critical of Ethereum. We called it a secure. It's later been labeled a security, but it's too big to fail. It's too big to attack. Is this one of those things that we're going to have to talk about again? Is it coming back six months a year? Josh, are we going to still talk about the new world coin? If open AI and Sam Altman wasn't behind this, I'd say we weren't here about it again. It's a hype trade and pump and dump scheme because he is behind it. It means there's a hell of a lot of money behind it because there's iris scanning involved and it's an ATM. I think there's going to be a lot of powerful people wanting to push this. I think we'll hear about it more and don't touch it with a large poll. Dan Eve, when you think I'm looking at the top four coins, it says Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple, and Litecoin. Are we going to add world coin to that list? Is this like mega coin and fast coin? Everything else comes back to. What's that? What's that? Bitcoin is going to be a big coin. I think I'm going to have Josh. I think we haven't even got started on this hype trade yet. I think it's going to go. I'm not sure about the price going mental, but I think it's just going to envelop all these crazy people who want to get their eye scanned, get some free coin, thinking it's the next Bitcoin. It's going to follow that gen, that cycle of all these other crazy things that popped up. There's a lot of money behind it. There's a lot of huge existing parties. There's a lot of big, huge names behind it. I don't think it's going to just pit out of existence. I think this is going to be around for a while, whether it's successful or not, I don't know. This could be the thing that literally makes optimism. The moment optimism doesn't really have much going for it, other than being in layer two with less liquidity than all the other layer two's blah, blah, blah. This could be one of the driving factors that actually makes optimism pump. As obviously it's the network that's bringing pessimism. That's what I think. I do think it's going to be around for a while. I think sadly we're going to be talking about it and there's going to be some crazy stories coming. There's going to be lots of drama with this one. It's going to be a giant Pandora's box. The funny thing is, apparently Americans aren't even getting the ad rock. So Americans are going scanning their eye, doing all this and they get nothing. They get nothing for it. It's just because the SEC is going to drag them in front saying, oh, you can't offer something. It's just, oh man. I agree with the panel. I don't think it's going away. I think that we're going to see him much like Sam Bankman, Frieda on the cover of Fortune magazine, on the cover of Forbes, on the cover of INC, or if they still have these things. He'll be holding this orb. They'll all be about the physical device that he made a shiny circular device that looks really nice. It looks like an Apple product. It looks like something you might put on your shelf. What a beautiful world. People are going to love it. And then like Josh said, like others have said, if you give someone the coin, they become a supporter of the coin. They start checking the price, not a Bitcoin every day, but a price of world coin, too, or whatever every day. Still, they'll be a bunch of those. Then they'll be a bunch of other people that are paid by people to show this. They're probably going to show up in our comments today. So yes, I fear this is not one that's going away. This is a continuing ongoing nightmare. And that's to say nothing about world coin database hacked, world coin, orbs hacked, world coin secret embedded code inside of orbs sends the hashes of your iriscan to secret database. This is all going to happen allegedly in the future. We will go ahead and predict that. So price down massively because every week there's an airdrop and it gets totally diluted. Now the SEC drags Sam, Altman in front of, you know, first we have Sam Bankman, Square everyone. Now we have Sam Altman, pumping the altcoins. What's with these Sam's? You can't write the story just like every late night talk show host is named Jimmy. But that's of course something that happened before the writer strike. No one even thinks about that anymore. It's very sad. Moving on to issue four. Redditors hacked Bitcoin is a lesson on the hidden dangers of paper wallets. And this is a very sad story. A Reddit user thought he was doing the right thing using proper practices, creating a paper wallet. As we know, we haven't really suggested paper wallets since, as the article says in 2019, the randomizer of the paper wallets was called into the question as well as if you're using some random website. You really can't trust it. That's why most Bitcoiners have gone away from paper wallets and use something like a treasure or a ledger. Dan Eve, what do you think? He lost all his Bitcoin. He had a paper wallet. It seemed like a good plan, but it didn't pay out. Oh, it's savage. And you know, he even thought that that he, you know, got used this service and he did the offline thing. He air gaps his computer, took it offline and then generated his private key and seed. I think it was private key. And then yeah, he got hacked. And this is really sad because somebody thinks they followed the process and done the right thing. And yeah, they've still been succumbed to a vulnerability. But it goes back to the old trusting in a website. You're trusting in the software to produce that private key for you. And it may not happen in, you know, immediately you get hacked. They might wait a year as happened to this person. But because they wanted to spread as much as possible before they actually hacked people, before they actually, you know, pilfer all the money. Who knows how many other people have been hacked in this kind of same scenario? And they don't even know it yet. And they don't even know it yet. Exactly. Yeah, they haven't checked their balance or they, you know, or they'd be long-term savings. They just don't want to look out or they haven't even linked it to this. And they thought that they just, you know, they put their private key somewhere where they shouldn't have done. But it's a really difficult thing about, you know, it's such a huge responsibility. And I've mentioned it before. I've never had to change changing your ledger like your seed or your treasur seed. You know, that act of going from one to the other, it gets more intense each time that you have to even if you've got nothing, like even if it's a couple of hundred dollars, you're like, I've got to generate the seed again. And how do I do it? And do, you know, do a fresh install of Linux, do tails in store. And then, you know, do the key generation from an air gaped tails Linux machine. And is that safe enough? And if I'm writing your down, what if a camera's seen me? What if someone's filled, you know, filming my computer or my phone accidentally went over it like this. And now my seed somewhere. And if I put it in this place, it's a really difficult act to do. I think it's quite challenging to feel secure when you're doing it. Someone in the article, they said, well, you know, I hate to say it, but you know, there's this is why custodians are kind of good. And and and it kind of, you know, if you do have that level of fear of generating your seed and because you've got a trust in someone again, you've got to know this whole thing is Bitcoin, Bitcoin, be a trustless. You've got a trust in so many different third third parties. You've got a trust in the computer, the hardware, the software you've got a trust in the software, the hardware wallet, you've got a trust in the key generation, you've got to trust it, almost everything that you use. But and you have to battle through all of these different layers of trust to get into the trustless network. It's really obscure when you think about it that way. But it's it's sad to see people lose their their keys and maybe this is why ledger, for example, have the service because yes, you don't want, you know, lots of people don't want their private keys being held by a third party in any way. But then there's lots of people who are still, you know, crapping themselves about holding their own money. Oh, I lost my car key the other week. How am I going to keep hold of, you know, something that could turn into a million dollars. So they do want to put their trust in in a third party. You know, like my my mum's always said, you know, if I, you know, if I can't hold my own Bitcoin, if I had it, I'd have to have someone I could phone a shout out when something goes wrong, you know, she doesn't want to end up shouting at herself if she was to lose her private keys or something like that. So people like using a third party service. And you know, and and they like the ability to offset that risk to have someone else think about the processes that are behind it. And there's this trade off you have a trust between trusting in a service to generate your private keys, trusting in a hardware wallet to to to keep your crypto safe, trusting in the bank that holds your seed phrase, you know, you're putting trust in all these different parties. So I can see why there's that appeal of using a service like I'm not trying to justify it in any way, obviously. But as Trezz has said, right, they've essentially anyone who makes a hardware wallet almost anyone has got a backdoor to the to the private key. Well, it needs the seed phrase. Well, it needs a software update and they can be extracted. So again, this this trustless this trusting in trustlessness trust trust trust in trustlessness. It's like a I don't know, it's like a tongue twister. But yeah, very sad that you can use your private keys. I've never seen a great, you know, there's plenty of examples of how you could you could store your feet your seed phrase, but there's always holes you can pick in in them, not in the way that someone's presented it, but in how a very easy human error could mean that you end up giving your private key out accidentally. And I'm not talking about, you know, going on some stupid email that says, Hey, this is Coinbase or Trustwall and try meta base meta whatever is meta, mask and you need to give us your private key because we've changed software. Not talking about those hacks. I'm talking about just misplacing your seed phrase or putting it in somewhere where you think is insanely not in obvious, but is actually really obvious. So yeah, there's all these questions that kind of that that you know, bait my gizzards when it comes to like how to store a seed phrase carefully. And yeah, you've just got to be have your wits about you and and and do a lot of research. I think do a lot of research and do what you're comfortable with. And if you are comfortable with a third party, I probably get killed for saying this, like, you know, just let people let people like trust in the third party sometimes every now and then if it's if it's something like, you know, that if you can't be trusted, you can't trust yourself because you at least then, you know, I'm not saying keep on exchanges because that's bad. But maybe use a use a service that's a bit more kind of secure than than, you know, some site off the internet. If you are going to get into it. And then as your learning evolves, then you evolve the way that you store your seed phrase and store your coins. You know, you start off initially, it's a learning process until you get to a stage where you're comfortable with how you're storing your seed. It's like this, it's like your soul. It becomes your soul. And your soul needs to be in a good place and a safe place. I just think it's important that people use modern and new tutorials, especially with new software like Bitcoin. I know I've made a couple of paper wallet tutorials. I'm not sure I don't usually take videos down. Maybe I should make them private now or something. Just make sure people don't use those because obviously they're outdated. And we didn't know at the time that we were making them. I know Andreas used to recommend paper wallets all the time until we found out about this JavaScript randomizer error. And it's such a specific thing, such a hardcore thing to know about. I don't think most users would think about it or know about it. Like you said, Danny, download the air gap just computer. He's doing all this stuff. He's trying to be, you know, what we call a good Bitcoin or with a whole whole, whole drone, keys thing and all that. But it ends in disaster. So you got to have new tutorials. You got to have fresh information, especially with a cutting edge technology like Bitcoin. We don't even use the same address space anymore. I mean, you have these new BC one BC two addresses, the new Segway addresses and so forth. So much has changed even in just a few years. You can't trust your money to an old tutorial or just going to wallet generator.net, which I don't think has been updated in years. If it doesn't look like it's been updated, if it looks like an old website, don't trust your money to it. It was sold in 2017 and put some dodgy crap out apparently. That's what I read. But yeah, I have a girlfriend of mine. She has a paper wallet, so I better let her know to sort that out. But yeah, it's unfortunate, you know, the paper wallets used to be the great thing, you know, that along with, you know, brain wallets were interesting, but they're dangerous because if you bang your head and forget, and it's very easy to forget, forget, and a brain wallet for those that don't know, basically remembering your seed phrase. But yeah, very, very unfortunate story. Luckily, it was only $3,000, but still, you know, I think this is what Bitcoin.com and Bitcoin.org and these sorts of places should really help with newbies, you know, allowing, showing them the newest technology, you know, these namespaces like Bitcoin.com and.org. They really, especially.org should always lead people to the right things. And I think they do, but I mean, I've even heard of old treasors, which are like a bit too old now. And they cannot, they cannot get upgraded without deleting the seed. So, and if you don't know, if you have the seed or not, you can't even check if the seed works because the things too old and the software when you plug it in, it's like, this is too old, it needs upgrading. So, yeah, it's, look, this is, and it's getting harder to say, boys, I've got to say, it's getting harder to say, this is a new technology, this is a new thing, it's still growing, it's still, no, it's not actually where, like, what, 13 years old, like, it's, it's not new anymore. And we should have ironed out these kinks. We should have made it easier by now. The UX should be easier. But this is the use case for these custodians and that's what sucks is that the open source community haven't done a good enough job. And it's, it's driving fools into the hands of centralized authorities like Coinbase. And Coinbase have done actually being barely good actors if you discard the reporting ever unto the IRS and all this other stuff. But they've been fairly good actors in the fact that they haven't run off with people's coins and the same with, same with finance actually. So, you know, but the unfortunate thing is that centralized custodians are being trusted more and more by people because they read stories like this. And anyway, even doing this, like, you have to jump through so many hoops and dandes just, but on and I've said it for years, this bullshit that Bitcoin is trustless is such a farth. It's like saying electric cars are green. It's just nonsense. They're fun to drive. You can say that. They're the best I've got one. I love it. And, you know, but it's they're not green. Like, it's just not. And so to say that Bitcoin is trustless isn't because of all the software needed. Unless you're a full on boffin that can write the code yourself from scratch. And even then you have to trust yourself and your skill sets. So there's no such thing as trustlessness. There's just trust lessness. And that's what you're trying to get through is trusting less in certain things. So yeah, that's that's my two cents, my two bits. Well, Josh, I want to defend the open source committee just a little bit, the community. As Andreas used to say, we've had physical security for thousands of years. Valtz locking up things, having guards, multiple copies of things and multiple vaults splitting up your money, things like this. We've only had computer security for like 20, 30 years here, 45 years maybe as I get older. So it is very difficult to keep a secret on a computer, right? As easy as we might say, we just don't have the secure chips, the secure on glaves, the privacy chip, all the things we've talked about as possibilities to solve this problem. We just don't have them. Hopefully they're working on them and it gets better. But right now it's easier to keep something in a physical vault, in a bank, or a safe deposit box or whatever that it is to keep it on a computer, especially computer that's connected to a network of other computers. But it's getting late, we're running out of time. Dan and Eve are you ready with a prediction or a story of the week? Go ahead. So my story of the week was attending the AVE on Valley Bitcoin adventure, which was really cool. Victoria Jones is there from Stoshich Page, and obviously I worked WCN's Benark, doing a good Ellen Bits and Nostra presentation and some other cool stuff where there were people, there was even a Bitcoin hairdresser. There was some cool, I really got a cool action, what's it called, a comic, like a Bitcoin comic. Just a really cool conference with a little mini conference, lots of families there and stuff, because it was in this little kind of AVE on Valley country park with with a soft play and all sorts, which couldn't drag the kids away from, because it was like open until like 10 o'clock at night, so it was like impossible to get the kids out. But it was really cool. So I'd recommend going next year. I think the organisation, he was saying that he might not do it next year and I was like, man, it's like the harvining, it's the harvining year next year. You can't not do a Bitcoin conference in the harvining. So hopefully it's still on, but yeah, that was a really cool conference and again, nice to meet up with Ben and Victoria and some other, you know, Bitcoin as usual. Josh Jagala, prediction or story of the week, go ahead. Yeah, my story of the week was basically the same thing, it was two weeks ago and it's such a good time at the Mallorca blockchain days. It was a really great theme, my good friends, Thomas and Dan and Ben Arck and Victoria and a whole bunch of other people. So, I found out to them, I went, docks them all in their names, but you know who you are. And yeah, it was sensational. We had a really great time, we had a lot of really important talks about where this technology is going. We like to think that we have some sort of sway because all of us together know a whole bunch of other people in this space and it's important to have these conversations. What's happening with CBDCs? What's happening with FED now? What's happening with crypto, with KIC? What's happening? Where is the creep coming in? And we discuss these points and hopefully they they stem out. We had Peter Todd there, you know, Peter's an old timer in this, you know, he was in there arguing with Satoshi back in the day and we had a lot of really strong voices in the space or all come in into one place over on on Mallorca or Mallorca. It's like Mallorca. Yeah, it was really good. So, you know, guys, if you get time to, you know, book, book's in timing for next year, Mallorca Blockchain Days is a really strong good conference. Make sure you book the full ticket where there's a boat ride at the end. It's a bit more expensive but totally worth it. We have a great time going out on the boat and throwing treasors over the board and then reporting it to the cops lost. So, I'm just kidding, but it's a really good time. Do yourself a favor. I agree, Josh. It was a great time at Mallorca and I'm still in Europe. I went back to Barcelona for a little bit. Recently, I've been in Rome and tomorrow I'm going to Venice. So, I got to shut this down, pack my bags, get up early and go to the airport. So, it's fun to be out and about and traveling. I did the big, curious things this time. Took down the assisting chapel and the inside of the Coliseum. So, great time to be traveling. It's a little warm, not as warm as it could be. It was worse last week. So, I dodged a bullet there. But thanks to everybody for watching. Be sure to give us a thumbs up down below. Add a comment. Hello to everybody in the chat. Thanks for joining us. And until next time, bye.