#447 — The Bitcoin Group #447 - Recovery? - Crypto Capitol - Rap Theft! - Cool Tech

The Bitcoin Group, the American Original. For over the last ten years, the sharpest Satoshi's, the best Bitcoin's, the hardest crypto currency talk. We'd like to welcome our panelists. Ben Arck from LNBits. Hello, good evening. Josh Shagalla from the standard.io. AvenonGov. And I'm Thomas Hunt from the World Crypto Network. Moving on to issue one. Issue one Bitcoin recovers ahead of Trump's block work speech. Is a major bull run about to begin? Just last week everyone had given up on Bitcoin. Penny, Penny, the sky is falling. They thought the price was just going to go down forever. Now the president's making a speech. The stock market seems to have stabilized. And people are saying they just might be a second leg to the bull run like all the charts said in the first place. Ben Arck, the price of Bitcoin is saved and we have political speeches to think. I think it's denial. If we have a look at the charts, this is a new section I want to call Bitcoin charts and trading with Ben. We've got a... It definitely needs a jingle. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. We've got a descending wedge. We've got a dead cat bounce. We've got no support. And we're fucked. Sorry. So we're so early on in the show. So this is all the Trump hysteria. And then we bounce along. And then it's all going downhill from there. And I just can't see any recovery. Significant recovery, which is going to happen. Because it's just not enough momentum. Dead cat bounce is all the way, baby. And then our next resistance zone is at what, like, 60, 60 grand or something. So that's probably where we're heading. Just off the back of this, you know, you've got the leader of the free world. Well, the US president is doing a televised video call talk promoting Bitcoin and talking about how they're going to make this Bitcoin reserve and make the US. The center of Bitcoin adoption, blah, blah, blah. And look how much the market cares. Just doesn't really care. So yeah, not very, not very bullish on the news. And similarly, when it comes to the stock, the general sort of stock exchange, it's there's too much instability. Maybe if something happens, which creates stability, like the Trump actually manages to have an impact on the Ukraine crisis, I think that would have a good impact on the markets because people would be like, OK, this guy's not a lunatic. Maybe there's some method to his madness, which I personally don't believe. But the markets might reflect that. And then there'll be some stability with all the tariffs. And it's like here, it's like you've got fair weather, a fair weather cycle in the economy, where we could be, you know, having a good time and having a bit of a bull run. And then he's decided to fill it full of storms. Which is quite scary because then when you have these like one events like over it or a war or whatever else and that, you know, usually you use the surplus from your fair weather, the economy to then buffer out the dip in the market. But I don't think that's going to happen because we've created this sort of a necessary choppy weather in the markets. So yeah, pretty bearish on everything. Not much more to say, really. Well, if your standard is the president not acting like a lunatic, you're going to be in tough supply this time. I still think there's a possibility of a supply squeeze and an altcoin season and everything that everyone wants. Josh Chagalla, what do you think the president's promoting Bitcoin? Is all we've ever wanted and all we've ever needed, right? Well, I mean, I think that the economy has, there's no, there's no, it's been set up for a non-fair weather event. The crisis in Europe, the crisis in the Middle East, they were all there before this champion got into power and it will get sorted. It will get sorted. We will have peace and the market needs to crack. In fact, the markets have been so overblown over the last few years. And not only that, I mean, the entire system, the fractional reserve system has been built upon debt on debt on debt on debt on debt. It's very, very hard to pay down. So everything that the US is doing and inspiring the rest of the world to do is really, really important. We need to remove this vast amount of debt because it gets so crazy, crazy out of control that especially America, because America underpins the rest of the world with their money supply. When they print everybody prints, when they start to save on, well, if they have less inflation, the rest of the world starts to do the same. I think what will happen is the market needs a correction anyway because it was pumped on fluff. The entire market was a massive teraluna fluff machine and it needs to have a correction. So that's what's happening. And yeah, it's an exciting time. It's an exciting time to work, load up on some liquidity. So you can actually buy some of the assets that you'd like. And this goes for traditional assets like houses, property, real estate, all that sort of stuff, as well as cryptos. You can't keep going up and up and up in a market. Markets need to correct especially if they're built on fluff and nonsense. Like they were through the COVID nonsense, printing money out of nowhere, bailing everybody out, specifically the banks and saying that it's a check for everybody is stimulus. All these checks that they sent everybody, they got sent to the banks first. The banks paid off debts first before they gave it to people. The whole thing was a scam. And it was a scam that basically got paid for by savers through inflation. And now, well, we're going to have a correction. That's just part of it. It's never been hidden politicians like to hide the fact that there will be, if they're proper, if they're a shit politician, just like a shit CEO, they will try to make a company go up and up and up in stock. They'll only think short term by making go up and up and up. And they won't, you know, a bad CEO will basically just do short term thinking to make the speculators happy on the stock exchange. Whereas a good CEO will think long term will do proper spending, will pay down debt, will buy all the machinery necessary to have a fair weather lifestyle within their company. And then that will work out. Yeah, the shareholders might not be happy in that first six months when the CEO is buying all that really important stuff for the company. But long term, they'll be happy because he's, you know, he or she is building a fantastic company that will stretch out over time. Well, that's why I'm glad we have a good CEO that's been in charge of such a large company with so many stockholders, so many boarder directors meetings. Oh, wait, we have a CEO from a family company that's never had a shareholder or a boarder directors meeting. I do agree, Josh, it is exciting times like the Chinese curse. May you live in interesting times. And I also do agree that the market doesn't just go straight up. It does have these corrections. It has these ups and downs. Everyone's like Facebook stocks, the greatest thing ever. But it goes up and down, especially in these early periods, like we're in for Bitcoin. And as the man said in the Nirvana song, you should load up, load up on guns, bring your friends. It's fun to lose and to pretend. I just feel like the, you know, you could, you could be a little bit more cautious ripping off that banday. Just don't rip it quite so hard because I understand the markets need a correction, but what you don't want is, you know, arguably the great depression was a correction, but it sucked. And the anyway, the economy's managed to get out of the great depression was very massive governments bending and taxing the rich and things like that. And you deal. So desperate measures cause for, you know, desperate times caught, required desperate measures to get us out of that mess. And with taking like a globalized world and like shaking up the way Trump is, it could cause something like a great depression event. And that's what we don't want. We want a gentle correction. So just want to be a little bit more tentative in his reforms. That's all I'm saying. Yeah, blah, blah. I'm sick of the politicians are, we'll have a meeting in an inquiry about this and that. And they just never get shit done. All they do is have meetings because it's got to be gentle. Now, getting there, he's got four years getting there, clean it up, clean up the nonsense. Yeah, Australia, for instance, has 17% public sector workers. 17% of all workers are paid by the tax, but ridiculous, a ridiculous amount. It needs private sector is voluntary. It's not paid for by coercion and force. It's paid for by voluntarily, people voluntarily paying for that service. And this is, this is what the North stuff for me personally is. How do we remove more violence and coercion? And how do you have more peaceful markets? And that is the free markets. Well, and I think that's the example right there at Josh wants a government that's more like a business, more responsive to people's needs and Ben wants it to slow down and think about the consequences. And I think we're going to find out what the difference between those two attempts and approaches is. And I think that we're going to see the main difference here is when early investors lose all their money in Facebook, their early investors. Usually they're even accredited investors, i.e. already rich. So it's not a big deal if they lose their money. But if someone who's on food stamps is now entered into a market, things go up and down. They lose all of their food stamps money. They starve to death in the same day in the same way. If you move fast and break things and you're at a startup and you mess up and you turn off the server over the weekend, we lose some traffic. We lose some business. It's not great for the company, right? But if I turn off Ebola protection over the weekend, if I turn off food aid over the weekend, I can kill people, millions of people. And I think that's what we're going to see is that when you run the government like a business, the outages, the little things on the side, the externalities they call them in business, the collateral damage we call them in the military. Collateral damage is going to be people's lives. And we're just going to think that governments have collateral damage by all the crap they've and the massive overhead in the bureaucracy has collateral damage. Then then you're totally blindfolded to the fact that we're going to be able to know because we know what the current system is doing. And when you take everything away, we're going to do a new set of studies and we're going to find out what happens without the current system. And we're going to call all studies and you're going to lose. Well, again, studies, you just need to monitor the market. The market will grow. You're going to be priced fee, but we have to observe everything. We're going back to an observer culture where like cavemen, I don't believe it. I didn't see it. Let's go back to studies. Study. That's not true. The free market is the government's a caveman. Free market. Right in the future. The the few. I got a call in my cousin's and life is. Markets is free. Is me going to bend? I voluntarily want to give you value that I've collected for the service that you've that you've created. Not the give me your money. Don't worry. Don't worry. We're going to do good things with it. But you're holding a gun to my head for the money. No, no, what? No, we're going to do good thing. We're going to educate children. Pay up. Like it's just nonsense. It's a nonsense system. Free and voluntary is the only system we should be we should be heading towards. I'm partly in agreement with with Josh on free exchange of goods and services. But I do think that's the massive difference in types of private capital. So big corporations, for example, that's a very different sort of capital to, you know, SMEs, which are providing a local service and pump it into their local economy. And I kind of fear that some of the tariffs and some of the measures which Trump takes is going to impact some of those smaller businesses, which might just not have the reserves to tie it over for stormy weather when it comes to the economy, which is what kind of happened in that great depression event. But as Thomas is saying, you know, it's going to be, let's see, let's see what happens. You know, it's a brave new world. I hope Josh is right. And I hope that we're wrong because it'll be a better world for it. But I fear that I fear that maybe it's a little bit too much unpredictability for people's lives and the economy and it might have a negative effect. But we did say at the beginning of the show, we were like, no politics, no religion in this show. And look at this. Well, let's also not lose track of what's great about a startup or what's great about a business. Most anything that's wrong with a business can be fixed with money. If you get a new round on your startup, it fixes all the problems from your previous round. However, if we look at the way that government works, if you cut off education funding, people don't go to school, they don't go to college, we don't get useful educated people out of those people, we lose that input in the same way. If we don't give food to people and they starve to death and die, we lose that input. We can't just put in another $5 million, get that person's live back. So I think we're going to see by the studies the horrible results of this plan. How do we circle around to Bitcoin? How does Bitcoin fix all this? Remember we're at a Bitcoin show. Well, first we go to the picture and we say, well, what a horrible old picture. Who's that guy standing behind the president? He's not there anymore. I wonder why I think they tried to. He's a dick. That's why I tried to hang him. But let's move on to the round to exit question. Trump vows to make the US the undisputed Bitcoin superpower and crypto capital of the world. The former wrestler said that he wanted to pass landmark legislation, creating simple common sense rules for stable coins and market structure. Ben Arck, they say Bitcoin, the guy is bribing with Bitcoin, they get him to go to the Bitcoin convention, they waive the Bitcoin flag. And then all of a sudden, all the meetings are about stable coins. What do you think? Are they going to respect Bitcoin or is this another end around where the powers that be the new boss is just like the old boss and they go after Bitcoin again? I thought I forgot that he was a wrestler. But he was a wrestler. Who was a wrestler? What? Trump, he was a wrestler. He answered the ring a couple of times. He had that fight with Vince McMahon. It was pretty cool. With a chair, he was thrown into a table. Yes. For like it. For like an unhelpful United States was a good buy. A wrestler. Yes, fake. But a healthy guy doesn't exercise. He's quite impressive. He didn't hurt himself too much. Secretary. So a nation also, wife of the wrestler and involved in the actions on stage as well. Many, many, many, many videos. I think he's starting to shrink the cool aid on the Bitcoin stuff. I honestly think that the US appreciate that if they want to keep the US dollars, the world was over currency, probably their best place just to somehow adopt Heather. Because it's already penetrated the market. It's already used widely. Rather than try and produce their own stable coin thing. And you know, it's just a tie. It's like it's really hard to get these things right. And if a whole economy is dependent or overlying it upon that technology, then you have to be very careful. Whereas Ted has proved himself to work when it hasn't broken yet. So I honestly think that they're looking at that as a possible solution for a US dollar, like a digitally native US dollar. And then when it comes to Bitcoin, they also think they probably know that when you have fear and Bitcoin existing in the same world, like fear is kind of on a downward spiral. In that they have Bitcoin has a whole bunch of properties which fear just can't compete with. And it will be out competed with over time. I was thinking earlier today, there will be a point where a country does a micro strategy. It just solves government bonds and buys Bitcoin, sells government bonds and buys Bitcoin. The argument being in 10 years time, Bitcoin can be worth an actually fortune, which gives the government bonds some value. So yeah, I think there's a lot there. And he's having a lot of advice from people like the micro strategy guy, sailor, of course, name for a second then. But I think he's, I think he's also got the other guy, the guy with the funny voice sources, the Kennedy guy. He's got him as well and he seems to be an actual Bitcoiner for all his faults. He is an actual Bitcoiner. So I think he has a lot of people probably saying the right things to him and accumulating Bitcoin, creating a US stable coin for the world to use. I mean, the reality is, you know, like in these countries where we try and push Bitcoin adoption on the lightning network, like often the real problem is the stable medium of exchange issue if you're on subsistence wage and a lot of them use tether, a lot of them use stable coins because they need them in those countries for payments. And historically they were the countries which the US wanted to flood dollars into. So the use case is already there, the technology already exists. And yeah, I mean, it's, I think probably a wise decision to pay a lot of attention to stable coins. And then also he's some of the advice of the people around you who are talking about Bitcoin. Not that I want Bitcoin adoption from the top down. I want it from the bottom up, of course. So ultimately I don't endorse or care about it, but it's probably a good strategy. I'm going to make the same argument that I've been making and I'm going to keep making it. They control the US dollar. They control the world reserve currency. It's an incredibly powerful position to be in. Like Ben said, if you don't like the dollar, if you think it's no good, make a digital dollar, not just the ones that the banks use and send around, but an actual digital dollar for the people, a consumer product. If you don't like inflation, tell the Fed to stop printing money. Don't spend the money in tax cuts, which is what's going to happen. Spoiler alert. But once again, they control the US reserve, the world's reserve currency, which is a position of power in the world. If the United States loses being the world reserve currency, whether it's to Bitcoin, to the yuan, to something else, it's less good for the United States, less good for the country that they run, less good for the country that they allegedly live in. So I don't understand this. Like if you're any other country, you're like France, you're not the world's reserve currency, destroy your own currency, replace it with a Bitcoin, compete against the dollar. If you own, run, control the dollar, hold all of your assets in dollar, your real estate is valued in dollars, why destroy the dollar? And unless you're against, you're working against the country, you hate the country. That's cool. Destroy the dollar. You think it would be funny. You think chaos is funny. You think revolution is clean and pretty. And the results are going to be fine for you. Destroy the dollar. I don't know. Is it not just getting ahead of the revolution? Like they see the writing on the wall and then they're like, well, okay, we can try and fight this thing, which is impossible. And so we're not going to win all. We can try and get ahead of it and then produce like a stable US dollar, which everyone's going to use. And while doing that also start accumulating some Bitcoin, because probably that at some point will outcompete the US dollar. Because you've got these things like, you've got these things like, make up these things. Maybe this is a possible theory, right? We're coming in for a safe landing. But again, they control the actual resource. So for every other country, safe landing, hedging your bets, all of these things are fine. But if you're the country that owns the thing, what you're doing is you're increasing the problem. You're starting a domino effect. Whether you believe the dollars doomed or not, you're looking at this again like the foundation series by Isaac Asmoth. Do we have a thousand years of darkness or a hundred thousand years of darkness? But then the US dollar itself, like it's a value is your faith in the US economy to be able to honor that that things you can pay the bearer with, isn't it, as a fee at currency. So if there is this process of accumulating Bitcoin and they have these holdings, so ultimately like if it does shift to more of the world shifts to a more Bitcoin economy, where everyone's transferring value and Bitcoin, then by them having a Bitcoin reserve, it is going to put them in a bad position because they still have that good faith. They still have OK. As long as the Bitcoin reserve is secret, it puts them in a good position. What we have here is the opposite of the Doomsday machine from Dr. Strangelove. In Dr. Strangelove, the Russians have created a Doomsday machine. If you fire a weapon at us, we will destroy the world. Doomsday, therefore no one would fire the weapon. The problem is they turn the machine on on Friday with a plan to tell people about it on Monday. So there's this gap. In the same thing here, you have to keep it secret. If you're accumulating Bitcoin publicly, if you're making speeches about it, whether you like it or not, destroying the value of the US dollar, the currency, the thing that you own, you are making it weaker, whether there's a run or not, and you're accelerating the run. Oh God, you've got a such an extreme case of TDS. Like anything that guy does, you just against it. Like it's amazing. Talk about the specific issue. Don't just contemplate. Contemplate what you like. Talk about the specific issue. OK, the specific issue is that and you're weakening the thing you own. Why is that logical? Because he's not buying it. He said all they are doing is keeping the Bitcoin that they confiscate. I don't even like that. I'm not saying it's a good thing. I don't care about that. He's the thing. They want to expand the program. So essentially, they're actually doing worse. You're creating the theory of the Doomsday machine without actually making the machine. Like you have to actually make the reason. They're saying, look, it's value here because it's aware. They're saying there's value here. Why are we selling it to the free market? Sorry, but Josh, there's value in the whole Rolex watches. There's value in real estate. There's value in art. Many things are confiscated in from criminals. And they have value and we don't keep them in a reserve. I'm just saying that it makes sense to stockpile Bitcoin for anybody. Whether you're a master of common names. Whether you're a mafia or a government. Whether you're a mafia or a government or a private citizen, it makes sense to stockpile the rarest thing on the planet. The only thing that's rare is you as an individual. You don't need to buy this stuff. But also taking advantage, and I've said this on the show many times, taking advantage of the fact that America has, by default, the crypto advantage because everybody uses US-based stablecoins. They should take advantage of that. The EU is busy being idiots, absolute fools, by destroying it through regulation. That nobody's ever going to make a euro-stablecoin that makes any sense. They will never pick up that network effect. The US is lucky enough to already have the network effect by default. The system was born with it because Tether. And they are going to take advantage of that by supporting US-based stablecoins. Keep the fact that everybody, whether I pay a trillion worker or somebody in El Salvador or somebody in Africa, they will be denominating it in US dollars. And that's all they care about. And that's fair enough. If I was the mafia running my own US, my own currency, I'd also want the world to denominated in my currency. And that's what's happened, and they should support it if they want to keep their dollar. Because eventually everything will be crypto. Work, work. It's absolutely like work with the advantage they have. Why would they fight it? Like it doesn't make sense, they think. It doesn't make sense. It only makes sense if the banks are lobbying them to crush it, which was what was happening under a democratic rule, under the Democrats. It was basically destroy everything through the SEC, through this nonsense bureaucracy. Now it's like it's way more supportive. And I think it's going to be a, we're still going to see a massive bull market because of it. Yeah, and I honestly think this is the micro-strategic. The existence of Bitcoin is the death rattle for fear currencies. We all know that. And because it can't exist in the same market as Bitcoin, because you have a micro-strategic, you have these bugs in the system, where you can just get credit by Bitcoin. And then Bitcoin, the inflation is going to go up in value. And there's nothing the fear can do about it. And then as soon as a government starts doing that, then it's game over, like fear is dead. Like it's just dying. It's just on its deathwood spiral. And why wouldn't the US government want to get ahead of that? Particularly like you say, Jon. Because they have the, everyone's using tether, everyone's using USD stablecoins. It's a, it's a, the worst thing they could possibly do would be to try and fight the progression of Bitcoin. The best thing they could do is try and get ahead of it and accumulate as much Bitcoin as they can. Yeah. And, and, and small countries will try to follow the US, print their own currency to buy Bitcoin and destroy themselves. And, and it's not just that, it's that people will take out private credit to buy Bitcoin. And, and it is a bug in the system. It's a bug in the fiat system. You can print to infinity to buy something rare only to the point where people stop taking your infinite money for their Bitcoin. And, and at that point, you get, you get a, a, a God candle. That's when one Bitcoin's worth $600 billion right now. $600 billion. Oh, we're going to see, I wonder if we're going to see headless world reserve currency. You would want to have that happen as slow as possible. You'd want to delay that process. So anything that accelerates that process, you'd want to not do. You'd want to be in front of it and make sure you're the one driving that process. If it's going to happen anyway, if it's going to happen anyway. And I don't know that they believe it's inevitable. Again, they all believe it's digital gold right now. It's very conflicting with Trump because there's 10% of the stuff he does. And I'm like, that makes perfect sense. That's the right things to do. And the other stuff, obviously, I can't agree with because it's very sipillitically. But yeah, and this is one of those things where I'm just thinking that's the logical thing to do. And for doing it, maybe he's not losing that hate the guy, but maybe he's not losing the tick. I'm getting it from 90% is right. We've got a strange friend. Well, and again, it's not that he ideologically believes in this. He was not a Bitcoiner. He said that it was a scam many years ago after they paid it. Because he'd been educated. He'd been educated. Yeah, and money or he's been bribed. He's been over night with votes and money and no education. The guy famously doesn't even use email. Like he's not a digital person. He doesn't read books. I mean, I mean, so much Bitcoin is for everyone, even for not bad presidents. Come on. That's the other thing. I still don't think that we need government support. I don't think that this necessarily gets us where we're going faster. I think this makes whole like double crossing even worse when all of a sudden the government declares Bitcoin illegal. And everyone says, oh, but the president says it was going to be good. And we were going to turn off operation chokehold 2.0 and all this stuff. But at a certain point, like Josh and Fenn have said, if Bitcoin is better money, if it's better currency, if it is in every way better the way that the internet was better, the MP3 was better, then it's going to cause problems with the existing currency. And they're going to have to turn it off. I mean, I totally, I totally as well, like Thomas, you are. I mean, me and Josh here, we're speaking from other parts of the world and they get that you're in it. You know, that's your country. And it must be, I honestly, for people in the US who like Bitcoin, but then also like their country, I honestly get the, the, the, the hysteria, but the panic, you know, and also having to like just to having to come to terms with the fact that Bitcoin might not be in your country's best interest, the existence of Bitcoin. But honestly, this is probably the best policy. Just get ahead of the revolution and you work the advantage you have, which is they have all the stable coins out there. Well, Bitcoin's definitely not in the best interest of most countries. After we've talked about before, it ruins the ability of countries to sanction other countries. You can get around the sanctions using Bitcoin or other countries, things we've seen compare currencies. As we've seen recently in North Korea, hackers, incredibly talented people can bring funds back to your country through cryptocurrencies, upsetting the international order, making money in ways that that country is not capable of otherwise. It's very interesting. They could, they could argue the B tools, which we shouldn't have, like the ability to sanction other countries is arguably a tool like Keynes would argue that. That's why I wanted to ban core and apolitical, big and exchange for current countries. Because as soon as you have reserve currency, which can enact sanctions, then escalates into war. So as a force for good and for peace, like having an apolitical medium of exchange, which you can't sanction, and everyone can just use and you might not necessarily be such a bad thing. We also have the ability to print money and use it for disaster relief, to print money and use it for war, to do all these things, which essentially, if you take the Bitcoin experiment on a long enough timeline, it eliminates the ability of governments to do this. They're going to actually raise the money for real and not just create it. I'm not sure. I mean, I think they still, there is still within the tool set the ability to create value through token or whatever else. To create some value for as a sort of bond as to here's something you can buy now in the open market and this thing will be worth more money if we manage to fix this crisis, which we have. So I wouldn't, yeah, I wouldn't worry too much. Well, we'll see. We live in interesting tiles. The exit question for the exit question against the Bitcoin predictor ball, which of course was correct last week as it is always correct. Ben Arck will the price of Bitcoin be higher or lower this time next week? That gap bounces man. We're going down as no resistance. And off the president talking about Bitcoin in such a favorable way should have sent the price skyrocketing through the skies and it really didn't. There's nothing there. We're going down. Josh Shagalla higher or lower? I think we're going sideways for a while and build a good solid floor. This is what will be there building, but yeah, who knows who knows. All we know is that we don't know shit about fuck. Sideways push. That's the worst answer. Here we go. What's the price going to be? Will it be higher this time next week? And it is don't count on it. Don't count on it. The ball is pessimistic like Ben sideways. Yeah, because you did say to be fair Thomas, you did say is it going to be higher or lower? And then the ball said, don't count on it, which means sideways. So Josh is right. My basketball higher. I was asked to ball higher because that improves our odds. You said higher. I asked you guys higher or lower because you can make a binary choice. The ball is a yes or no question. I hope. I hope only this thing was recorded. Hey, check out worldcryptoneetwork.com. We've got 4,235 videos. Look at all the new shorts we've got with computer generated titles like exposed how I lost 50,000 sats to hackers. Hey, Ben, that's you. Check it out at worldcryptoneetwork.com. Moving on to issue three strategy ups strife offering to $723 million to buy more Bitcoin. Strategy also announces a 10% preferred stock offer to buy more Bitcoin raising debt in a different way than before. Previously, people would receive shares of micro strategy if they bought the stock now. They will receive dividends. Josh, Shagala, what do you think about micro strategy, strategy, and I guess strife, which seems like a negative thing to me, a raising money in a different way and using it to buy Bitcoin. It's this sort of wall street mentality where you kind of just build these strange vehicles to, to, to, that, that are almost just confusing, but there's a certain class of people that go, oh, that's a good idea. Whereas they could just go and buy some Bitcoin. Like, I mean, you know, we're living in a different world now where you can easily buy an ETF if you're that way inclined. You can do all sorts of, there's all sorts of vehicles and ways to buy Bitcoin, or to buy exposure to the Bitcoin price. And, and the best way possible from, for most people, would be still to buy the underlying asset and hold it. But that's not the best way for a lot of people, especially some, some other companies or funds because of certain regulatory or for judiciary duty. So, and, and it, it does open them up, like holding the underlying asset, does hold them up to security risks. So, by doing so, maybe it works for these certain subset of people, but yeah, it's, it's typical sort of wall street, Tom Foulery, where they, I don't know, just obfricate through weird financial vehicles. So, yeah, I'm, I'm not a fan myself, but whatever, to use you to use you want, I mean, for me, it's all re-hopification. It's the, it's the path towards re-hopification. It's what the Rothschilds did to silver by making a certificate instead of the actual asset. It's handy because you don't need to carry massive heavy bags of silver to the market to buy, you know, your groceries, because now you can just buy the receipt, bring the receipts and trade those. But you're not having the underlying silver, plus the vault that's holding the silver can start to lend out bits of paper on silver that they don't have. So, this is the sort of the slippery slope that you don't want to go down. But let's see, let's see, well, strategy A, they, they removed the micro, that's kind of cool. Should be, maybe macro strategy. I agree, Josh. This just drives me crazy because any of us, any of us on this panel, any of us watching this show could have had the idea, hey, let's buy Bitcoin. Let's go to the bank, let's get alone, let's buy more Bitcoin. Hey, let's go to the shareholders, let's get some more money, let's buy some more Bitcoin. Hey, let's dividends or whatever this new thing is, let's buy more Bitcoin. It's just, I, it's the simplicity of the thing, but at the same time, as he keeps stacking these instruments on top of each other, I know he's rich and he understands how this game works, but as a little normal person who looks up at this tower of money, I worry that it might someday fall over. And if it does fall over, it'll likely fall over right on Michael's sailor. I'm sure he'll be fine. He'll use one of his sports cars to get out of the way, but for a normal person, it seems incredibly risky to build all of this complex debt on top of each other, especially like we're talking about here, the possibility, which is real, when the US government and these decision makers realize that they've brought the Trojan horse inside the US financial walls. And they say, my God, who brought this Trojan horse in here, get it out of here. The price of Bitcoin goes down in the public sphere, which could wreck someone who's built a towering edifice of debt structures on top of Bitcoin. So maybe he gets away with it. Maybe it's all fine or maybe it all ends badly. But if it does, it'll be so large, the bad ending, the tower falling will be so huge. It'll, it'll just be, it's amazing. Like, is it a normal person like, you know? I agree with you or most of it, but I don't think it's going to, the tower is going to fall on Michael Sala. The tower is going to fall on you at home. Everybody, the little guy, it falls out on the little guy. So the problem with whales, right? If you have these mega, mega whales who are, who are only whales because they, they've built debt on debt on debt on debt. So that, you know, sailor was very, very lucky that Bitcoin didn't dip below a certain point in the bear market because there was a, there was a chance of a margin call on some of these structures and, and these are like reinforcements, right? So if these reinforcements disappear, all of a sudden, the whole thing collapses. And so this is a problem, this is the problem with Wall Street in general. They, they try to use vehicles like debt and promises to, to build higher towers and those towers when they fall, they're, they're painful for the rest of us because, hey, where does it fall? Well, it falls into the market in terms of massive market cells. And then people jump on those with shorts. And, and those shorts drive further the price down. So you get this rolling cycle. But if you know that's happening, and if you're a stuute, you can collect, drive out during these, these ball markets and, and be ready for those, those moments and actually collect rare assets at great, great prices. Bring your wife, bring your trailer and save. And what's so dangerous about this, Josh, is when they put these big bets on, they also put a liquidation number on the board. And whether it gets reached or not, as we saw recently with Tesla, just putting that number out there can sometimes make people want to conspire the market against you, causing the price to crash to your number. Dada, Dada, Dada, you get drained out. The company goes back up. Your idea was fine, but that number came up. And if this guy keeps putting those numbers up on Bitcoin, we might see a correction that empties him out, maybe even one caused by people who want to empty him out to get the reward of crashing his company, taking his results and so forth. Let's get Ben Archer. What do you think about Michael Sailor who keeps borrowing money in more and more creative ways as his nickname used to be pirate at 40? Who will that one? Yeah, I mean, I want to diverge off a little bit because there's a really interesting conversation happening in the chat with Starship, Shredig, his destiny, where he had this idea of mortgageing his flat to buy some Bitcoin, but everyone talked him against the idea. To me, one of the most profound stories I ever saw on the Bitcoin Reddit back in the day was there was someone who was dying of cancer and he sold his house and bought Bitcoin. And he had, I think he had 18 months left or something, he's like, okay, come into the summer house, going to buy Bitcoin, because I actually think I want to set my family up in the future and I don't think that the capital I have in my house is going to be able to do that. And this is when Bitcoin was trading it, probably about $600 or something at the time. And I was always really interested on the follow-up story as to what happened to his family, because I was like, that was a really, at that particular point in time was a really good play, what he did. Obviously, Bitcoin is very volatile. And if you go and do things like accumulate debt to buy Bitcoin, then it can really come around to buy you in the bump. But for that particular person, for me, it was one of the posts on Reddit, which always stood out for me just because he was just, you know, he was dying. And it was just such an interesting story. So Starship, Shredig's destiny, I'm not saying go mortgage your flat to buy Bitcoin, but and everyone will of course always advise you against such an idea. But the, I don't know, I mean, you just reminded me of that story. So, yeah. Famously, there was the Bitcoin family in the Netherlands who did exactly what you're saying. They sold their house. I believe you can move to a campground as horrible as that may sound, especially if you're raising children trying to have them attend school and so forth out of a campground, not a great situation. But I think they did very well. I think they bought low and the price went up. There might have been another thing though where they didn't want to sell their Bitcoin. So, they started getting into these same financial vehicles of taking loans and so on and so forth. So I don't know if that worked out for them. Yeah, to be very careful of selling everything, living in a living in squalor, depending on your timing, could have been very good in Bitcoin. For all we know still could be very good. We have no idea. Yeah, do a good friend, the rational investor. No, what was his name? Oh, Crikey. He sold everything. He sold it even his push bike to buy Bitcoin back in the day and it was a very, very good call for him at that particular point in time. But I mean, yeah, absolutely. There were some other people in the chat and they were saying, you know, someone like say there's, he's playing with other people's money, as opposed to his own money ultimately. Like he's always going to be a gazillionaire and always going to have a fancy car and a fancy house and a gold share and whatever else. So it's a different ball game for him. But this idea that I think what sailors kind of opened up to the world, this idea of just accumulating debt and buying Bitcoin and then just holding the underlying asset and then using it as a as a classable to then accumulate more debt into all these different financial instruments and appealing to all these different investors as well. So with Strife, the investors in Strife, they're getting a dividend. So if you have MicroStriker stock, then in order to be able to make any money on it, then you're going to have to buy install options for your stock, whereas with Strife, they get an actual dividend. So maybe there's some appeal there for a certain class of investor. It is however, pegged to the NASDAQs that you're exposing to MicroStriker to general kind of tech cycle market cycles. But I think it's what I don't like about sailors strategy and what he's brought to the table is he certainly got a lot of sway within the Bitcoin community and there has been an ideology shift from, I mean, for me, the interesting thing about Bitcoin is you know, they've been able to provide digital payment services to unbanked people for remittances around the world for people who need it and they don't want to pay these astronomical fees which you get from Western Union. All that good at Andrea Santanopolis stuff, that's the stuff I love. That's the stuff. That's why I work on the software I work and that's what I'm interested in. And so for me for there to be a culture shift to, I know we always preach the mantra of hard old, but there has already been that culture shift of just never sound underlying as late as you accumulate as much Bitcoin as possible and that's all you care about. That has filtered down into like V. So you call it true in Bitcoin and other parts of Bitcoin as well, which is kind of a shame because it obviously has this huge quality of being this great medium of exchange and being able to do micro-primities. These are the other amazing technologies. I don't like that about sailor however, like you say Thomas, it's just so simple and elegant like it Bitcoin exists in the world of fear. There's cheap credit you can get and you can buy more Bitcoin and I really think it's a matter of time until a country starts doing this and I honestly think that the US is queuing themselves up to we're at the point now where that dialectic between fear and Bitcoin is Bitcoin eventually emerges as the ideal money. I think it's snowballing and the cats out the bag like people are aware that these two forms of money can't coexist in the world like as long as Bitcoin exists, fear is dead like it's dying and that process is being accentuated and is moving faster because people are exploiting the traditional financial system in order to just accumulate this rare asset which is going up in value quite a lot and it stables. So yeah, you can't help but in some ways respect the dude for figuring out the glitch in the system. There's definitely as well a kind of a horrible tech anti-technology type thing happening here where we talk a lot about trace mayor and the various network effects and the powers of Bitcoin and one of those network effects is that Bitcoin is a network that it's not just digital gold that you just put in your vault, it's digital gold that you can send across the network, you can send to anyone, you can send in small pieces. If you cut off that power and you say, well, you can send it but no one does it anymore and maybe it's not because it's not useful, not because it's not a cheap or not affordable or not quick. All of those things just because of a tradition or a belief, a kind of a rumor or this thing that someone started, they're like Bitcoin is good but don't send it around, just hold it forever. It defeats the network effect in a way that nothing else could. Everything else comes with it says, wow, what a neat network you can use but if you just convince people because of like a superstition, don't use the network, they defeat it. I think Josh Gatsert, this is the whole work he's been doing with the standard sets, the missing piece, really stability. Why would you use it for medium of exchange if it's going up in value in the way which it is and what Josh is working on and the whole, but this is a whole idea of stable medium of exchange built on things like Bitcoin. It's very important because you can have Bitcoin, the asset which accumulates in value and then you can have all these other mechanisms to have stable medium of exchange which works with the digital stack which we've built and when it comes to what we do and the thing which I'm interested in, which is unbanked people, it's really is the missing piece, it's the reason I was talking about Bitcoin, it's the thing which will bootstrap an economy like surname where they have a Bitcoin presidential candidate who's very keen on using Bitcoin for medium of exchange, you need stability. Yeah, hard software when he's working on the stable coins, what don't Josh? Thank you. Yeah, it's the middle ground between Hottl and Spendl. Because eventually I realized yeah, everyone's right, you should Hottl but the problem is with Hottl is it never gets used, the reason why Bitcoin has such values because idiots like us in the early days spent it like crazy and that's what gave people the aha moment like, wow, I just got this number that you sent me on my phone instantly without a bank in between or a government, wow, this is amazing true private money but the problem is that everyone is like, no, Hottl, Hottl, Hottl, Hottl, Hottl is like, but the stuff isn't moving. Okay, well, if we look at it like gold, if it's digital gold then keep the gold and use the value of that gold as receipts but how can we do that better and that's why we built the standard? It's like, trading is right, it is rapid, Bitcoin, unfortunately, I'd like to build it on Bitcoin but I do also understand the logic of not changing Bitcoin too much so that, because we start to introduce other problems. But yeah, I mean, I think I think that's the future of Bitcoin is using as an underlying asset and I just don't like when centralised authorities do it, like strike or whatever Jack Mellor has or Michael Saylor when they offer debt on your Bitcoin or Celsius, Blockfire, these companies went bust and they had everybody's Bitcoin. Terrible, terrible. When this is the whole point, it builds maths, maths is the ultimate regulator. It seems as well like with gold, gold used to be a currency, they used to smash it up in a little pieces and they trade it and they'd send it all over the world. Why not do the same with Bitcoin? If the path to becoming gold was be a currency in little coins sent around the world, then become a reserve where people hoard the little coins in giant vaults and melt them down into big bars. Why not the same for Bitcoin? Just fake it to make it, follow the same path. And I'm going to horrify all the libertarians here once again, there will be a law against companies holding Bitcoin on their balances. This idea that you don't need to make widgets anymore, you don't need to be a company anymore, you don't need to have employees anymore. This idea could eat all of business. If the Bitcoin hypothesis that it just goes up and value continues to be true, there's no reason to do anything. Anything that you do is less valuable than you holding Bitcoin. And I think if we want to have any companies that make any widgets, we're going to have to make a law to separate those two to say, if you're a financial services company, sure, hold Bitcoin, hold stocks, hold altcoins, whatever you think is going to go up. But if you make widgets, we need you to keep making widgets, especially Apple computer and other things like this. If everyone just stops, which again, if you want to read Infinite Gest, you could. It's out there. Go ahead, Ben. I think you've got to make money, haven't you? So I actually think that the toolset and the technologies we work on in the crosshairs, the thing which is a stake is big evil monopolistic corporations, which actually in a free market, you don't really want that. You want lots of little companies all competing with each other and that's how a free market works effectively. And when you have big corporations monopolize a market that doesn't work, monopolize its resources. And I feel that everything we're working on, they're the ones who are really going to ultimately, they're the ones who are just going to give up producing stuff, which will then pave a way for smaller companies to set up and start producing stuff locally or whatever. And then you know, look at things like Noster. It's a way for, it's kind of a protocol which smaller capital can exist in, but it can't co-opt the overall commons of the space, the overall resource of the space. It's much like we have in Bitcoin. So I'm actually very positive. I've got this very utopian expectation for where the world's heading, where not only doers lefties, we're really happy because it gets with all the evil corporations, then people like Joshua happy because you actually have the free markets, full of all these companies who are competing within this sort of commons arena where they can't, they can't fully try and co-opt the commons. So I'm pretty positive about the future. I think everyone's going to be happy. I don't know, Ben, it looks like a real Harrison version on Iron Rand kind of horror show, where the companies that are not good at making things, they're the ones who get the idea to become Bitcoin companies first. So the ones that's not good at making computers. And then they make lots of lots of money and they can buy up the companies that actually make computers and stop them from making them. And it seems like that poem. But then why would they? They could just buy Bitcoin to your point. Well, I think you are the ones who want to, because to crush them, to own them. You just want to make them all the more people that work at Apple and get them to make more Bitcoin. I mean, humans want to build things. That's the thing. Like some humans actually want to build stuff. They don't want a number going up on their phone. They want to build things and run a team. They want to be leaders. They want to be. I don't know, Joshua. I read that. Zero to one book by Peter Thiel, the big startup guy. And I was already to be like, startups are cool. Let's make new industries. And at the core of his belief, and he's a major startup guy. So a lot of the startup people leave like him is that a startup is out there to make a monopoly. Amazon's out there to cut everyone out of business so they can make them not police. They can raise the prices. And no one comes. These are in possible prices. You cannot, in a true free market, you cannot have a monopoly. It's just, or in a legal, or in a legal monopoly, whatever allows me to raise the prices without any penalties and have no competitors. That's what I think you can have a monopoly is if you, if you get the state to do it for you. And to Joshua's point as well, Thomas, like most of the innovation, which a lot of these companies monetize, it's done by, like in university professors and academics and people who want on mega corporate salaries. So when it comes to people just wanting to build stuff and make things more efficient and this true, like people just, they like inventing things and being more efficient and creating new ways of doing things that just because you get rid of the big corporations doesn't mean you're not going to have innovation. In fact, you probably have a lot of innovation because you've got more, you've got more, you've got more private capital competing with each other. I don't believe I'm doing this, but I'm just going to give you a free month. You've got a salary. You've got a salary. You've got a salary. Just been cut. There's no more research being done. America's great, but whatever. There's no more research here. Sorry. All right. We'll just have to wait. See if there's more research. Let's go on to the exit question. Michael Sailor says things that other Bitcoiners have said and gets headlines. Sailor says Bitcoin will hit 13 million in 20 years. That's said, it is again. Josh Egala, Sailor says things other Bitcoiners have said gets headlines. Yeah. Well, I'm still waiting to see Ben's headline of what was it 600 billion 600 billion 600 billion. That's the headline that should be that protects 600 billion. Michael Sailor predicts 600 billion and one headline. It is amazing that there's always this new headline that acts predicts a million, acts predicts two million, acts predicts 13 million, 15 million, and it's like 600 billion or fuck off. Yeah. Yeah. 13 million. Finally, what's it? What a small fry thinker. Both Madbitcoins and Max Kaiser have both predicted infinity, infinity dollars. It will flip the dollar, the highest prediction possible. Can I tell the story of 600 billion? Well, it came from some of our listeners. Go ahead, Ben. Yeah. So my friend, DNI, who's a very, very gifted, very clever developer, he went to one of the Bitcoin conferences. And there's this kind of older guy there at the conference, the great great bid in the true sense of the word. And he knew a lot about Bitcoin. And my friend, DNI, he knows a lot about Bitcoin. He's a legit Bitcoin developer, has been for many years. And he was trying to disold the gentleman and over the course of the conversation, my friend, DNI, was thinking, man, this guy knows so much about the early days of Bitcoin. This guy could legitimately be Satoshi. And then it got to the part of the night where they'd had a few beers, and then my friend, DNI was like, well, how much do you think Bitcoin will eventually be worth, you know, a Bitcoin per dollar? And then this older guy, who legit got older, I proved himself in all this knowledge. He turns to my friend, DNI, and he looked him square in the face, and he just said 600 billion, 600 billion, a Bitcoin. And without a flinch, without a smirk, with nothing, 600 billion, a Bitcoin. And it broke, it broke my friend, DNI, because he's, you know, he's a, just developers, we can all be a little bit on the autistic spectrum. And he just spent the next month, just saying to all of his friends, 600 billion, what the fuck, 600 billion, 600 billion to the point where it ended up becoming this meme. So that's where the 600 billion meme comes from. It's from this, this, this, that wizard Satoshi wherever he may be. Brilliant. Yeah, 600 billion. That's, that, that's the North Star. Well, and what that does is that helps you quantify what we're saying about replacing the dollar, that it really will be that kind of insane price. And certainly at 600 billion, no one will own one whole Bitcoin. That's an unwrap. That's when the, that's when the US is printing huge amounts of dollars to buy Bitcoin to the point where everyone just gives up on using the dollar. And then the death, that's, that's when it dies is when it's 600 billion, a Bitcoin. Which is what they really want to do and what they've announced they want to do and what they've tried to do, but they can't do it with just executive orders. They actually have to pass a law to invest that much money into Bitcoin. That's why they're just using the seized Bitcoin so far, the, the drug dealers, Bitcoins. Well, Ben, thanks for stalling long enough. I was able to take a screenshot of this ad protected New York Times head story that, that you cannot enjoy because you do not pay for the New York Times. On any other day, any other day, this would be our number one story. If the president wasn't in Bitcoin, this would have been the number one story we would have broken down the whole show we could have went live for this. Here we go. Issue three, New York Times, sound engineer for M&M, stole and sold his songs for Bitcoin. About 25 unreleased songs by the rapper were discovered online. Investigators trace sales of the music to a former employee, according to federal prosecutors, the employee stole the songs for Bitcoin, Josh Shagalla, M&M, one of the greatest rappers in the world, multiple platinum Grammy award winning best selling artist, his song stolen early versions published online illegally for Bitcoin. What do you think about this story and how much value it places on Bitcoin that the New York Times even covers it? The New York Times. Yeah, it's interesting, isn't it, that if you have a product that's a digital product, it can be stolen and sold online. I mean, any sort of digital IP, including mostly it's your data out there for it. So this is the same sort of thing your data gets sold all the time. And so this is just another case of a digital asset being sold for another digital asset. And the thing is the reason why it's sold for Bitcoin is because you have a far wider market, you can sell it to anybody in the world. And yeah, I mean, maybe it should have been Monero because then he wouldn't be busted. It's, you know, Bitcoin, not too anonymous. Yes, it could have been Microsoft, it could have been secret government plans or secret corporate plans. It could have been anything, but it was M&M's Raps that they sold for Bitcoin, a thing of value. Ben Arck, what do you think about the Raps being stolen and sold for Bitcoin? Yeah, I mean, it seems like a bit of a dick move, like clearly, so in the article, it said that he had these songs on a storage device, you know, hard, hard, I was going to say hard, well, on a hard drive, and they were kept offline in a safe. And it's just these songs which he's working on and he needs to finish and then he wants to, he will release them to the world. And then the sound engineer who left the company then stole the songs and sold them for what seems to me to be quite a lower amount considering so in the article that says that he faces 10 years of imprisonment and a quarter of a million dollar fine. And I'm all four data wanting to be free, but to me it's just, you know, a bit of common theft from some of the other things. So how much did he get? He got $50,000 in Bitcoin in 2024 and it's probably a little worth that now. Oh no, yeah, well, no, we were small, but the, yeah, and he faces $250 fine. And so like you say, you probably should have sold it from an error on the dark market. But I think that the reality is there were so few people who had access to those hard drives that all point, all fingers pointed at him. Anyway, yeah, so that's a red come trial. That's true. And that's what it all comes down to. It's good old fashion police where I've said this also on the show, like stop tracking and tracing money, stop using money as the way to catch everything. Yeah, it's the easier way. But you need to, you need to architect money in a terrible way for that to be a possibility. The better way to do it is have free money, which is private. And because that becomes the best sort of money, best sort of medium of exchange. But you want to have good old fashion police work to bust these people. And good old fashion police workers like, hmm, who had access to that vault with a hard drive? Oh, it's this three people. Okay, where were you? And do, you know, whatever it takes to take a thief down. It definitely shows what a terrible idea it was to seal these songs. They were very unique. Only he and likely other recording engineers and M&M had access to them. So it was a very bad choice, bad decision. And as Ben was saying, the worst part about it is that now M&M is after this guy, M&M's after him. Oh, he's going to write a song about him. How much you hate Bitcoin, too? Yeah. So my song for Bitcoin. And Ben's also write it, it is terrible when this happens to unfinished work. There was a movie, I, sorry, I forget the name, not too long ago, where it was leaked and some of the effects shot were not finished. And people watched the movie anyway. And it basically ruins the movie in the same way with these songs. Sometimes incredible things are done in editing. Remixes different background tracks. They can change the entire way that you interpret the song. But if you heard the rough version first and it's no good, it could ruin the whole song. So it is a major tragedy for an artist when information is stolen like this. But like Joshua's saying, it could have been any data. It could have been Microsoft data, whatever it is. The key to us and to this show and why we covered it is because it was stolen for Bitcoin. We got a couple more stories. We'll cover quickly. We're running out of time. Bitcoin and Dogecoin are in the clear after the SEC says that crypto mining doesn't violate securities law. The SEC says Thursday that proof of work crypto mining with Bitcoin and Dogecoin doesn't fall under its definition of securities. Also, we've heard that Bitcoin NFTs layer two and restaking their hype is completely gone. No one cares anymore, which is exactly what everyone says right before everyone starts to care again. Josh Shagalla, what do you think about the SEC, which of course can be changed by the next president saying that it doesn't violate the law and the interesting story about NFTs and others losing their hype perhaps never to be gained again, which is what they all know. Before it comes back, go ahead. Yeah, I mean, something isn't collectible purely because it's collectible. We're seeing this in NFTs. We're seeing it. You can have a billion NFTs. This is why I meant in true free markets, you cannot have them monopoly. You cannot have them monopoly. It's just not possible. I know I've got pushback in the chat there, but it was redacted. But in a true free market, you can't. The thing is that if you try to walk into your, this is a little bit off-subject, but if you try to walk into the meeting of your board and say, right, we're going to buy up all of our competition and we're going to create a monopoly without the government because monopoly is only possible with the state, even though they're there to stop monopolies. If you get a company owned and buy up everything, you know what happens? Is that eventually you get to the very last company and their price is so ridiculously high and meanwhile, all these little startups like, if you see that crazy Josh guy, he's buying all the competition. Let's start some competition because he's going to buy us. That's just what happened. Why I'm saying this as well is look at the NFTs, look at all the shit coins out there. They're all competition because in crypto, it's a true free market. Billions and billions of competitions out there for the best meme or the best this or the best that. It's madness out there. The SEC can't, it's ridiculous. It was a fool's errand to try to stop it. I would say the regulation might need to happen on decentralized exchanges if you're operating in a certain country and you should follow their rules. But the hype is gone. The hype is gone, but it'll be back. Someone will find a collectible that is actually collectible and not just fast food. And this is the problem that's been diluted with fast food, the whole place. But yeah, a bit of a mixed come back there. Well, we might not need a total monopoly. I think an illegal monopoly is fine with me as long as it's Coke and Pepsi. And it's just Coke or Pepsi. And as we've seen in the past, you come up with a new product like Vitamin Water or there's a new one in the market and I'll call Pupi or Popsie or something. It puts positive things, healthy things into the drink. It was bought by Pepsi last week. It's as fine as you can have as many competitors as you want as long as Facebook can buy Instagram and Facebook can buy WhatsApp and whatever the new company is gets bought up by the structure. Like it's fine. And the government does seem to allow it Josh. They don't break him up. Google was supposed to be broken up. Microsoft was supposed to be broken up. We saw that fail now. Facebook is just openly buying competitors and crushing them. It's not a monopoly. A monopoly is where there are. Is there any competition? Yeah, but is there any legitimate competition of Facebook like Coke and Pepsi? Who's the number to? Yes. No one I know users Facebook at all. I do they used to share their photos with their family. No, no, no. No, they all use not. Yeah, a lot of people use not so there's plenty of competition out there. Plenty. This is this this would be this would be my what I would say to the idea of monopolies. So I think a monopoly obviously skewers of free market and Josh is saying that you can't have free can't have a monopoly but I mean the game when monopoly was was created to show that in a in a free market that you do end up with monopoly. But the so if I control the resources then it's very hard for other people to compete with me because I managed to privatize all the all the natural resources. I probably stole from Indigenous people whoever else. But the point is like how do you prevent monopoly and and the previous tools we had were were state control you would have a state in the state and this is why Adam Smith said that it would the state would have to come in and and then prevent a monopoly from happening. So there was there was free competition in the market. But as we've all seen that that's very corrupt and it's not probably the best way to deal with it and actually probably creates monopolies for their own interests because it is an all I got class after all. So ultimately we battle them with the free and open source technology stack where we turn all these things we should be commons into commons such as Amazon for example. So there was a couple of people chatting about the Amazon example. Me personally I don't think that that's the most efficient form of production that Jeff Bezos leaching all that value out of Amazon isn't efficient and there's more efficient form of production when the producers themselves get more of the value of the products they're buying but in order to do that you need a very complicated and technology stack to be able to compete with it more of a kind of commons cooperative. So I honestly envision a world where huge corporations like Amazon become cooperative commons of self-interested private capital competing with each other and then within everywhere else there's just a free market of private capital competing but when it comes to the big corpse the the Facebook's and the Twitter's they'll be replaced by NOSTA they'll be replaced by protocols which can you know you can you can you can do the same things you can do on Twitter with NOSTA and it's more efficient because you've got that permission to step out of that environment where actual human innovation can take place in a way which is very organic and isn't top down and encourages it and there's also competing capital as well within like Twitter doesn't have competing capital within Twitter whereas NOSTA does it has all these different projects which are all competing with each other so as I said before I'm very optimistic about a brave new world where those big corpse so like on the left when people talk about private capital they talk about the big evil corporations on the right when people talk about capital they talk about the you know the really lovely very healthy transactions which happen in a free market between consenting by consumers and producers and I think that we do ourselves a disservice by just lumping all private capital within the same basket and saying well this is private capital it's not like it's different it's you know that slavery was a form of private capital and it's sucked like child labor's a form of private capital and it sucks like this is spectrum of suckiness to greatness and I honestly think that the tools in which we're building within the Bitcoin ecosystem within NOSTA it has the potential not just within our own ecosystem within other ecosystems as well it has the potential to create a fairer better world where we replace evil like surveillance capitalism and all these coercive forms of capital which exists in the market and then we level the playing field so private capital can compete in a per free market and that's how you have a free market and that's also when state withers and dies which we all want to happen and so for putting your arm like that at that certain angle because the left will take a photo of that and say that now you're a Nazi yeah that's doing the Elon wave yeah don't throw your heart out of the crowd yeah I don't know Ben if that's going to work it seems like Ben's been reading Corey doctoros new book about how to save the internet how to read my I don't think that this is my whole economic theory I call it the Adam Smith invisible bitch slap so we had the invisible had the invisible hand so a lot of people misinterpret the invisible hand so Adam Smith's invisible hand really spoke about the invisible hand it wasn't just this magical ethereal thing where you all had these self-interested individuals which would then create an equilibrium within markets it wasn't that at all it was that the people the merchants at that time in the UK had invested interest in increasing the the living standards of everyone in the UK even if they were psychopaths just for their own security because it would mean that they would be more secure because everyone else is happier and and the less likely to try and steal you know their attack their mansions and try and steal their artworks or whatever else so those is vested interest by the merchants who lived in the UK at that time and the the industrialists but then what you had you had a shift from that form of private capital it's very interesting time in history it's in the late sort of 1700s where you had you had a shift from that form of private capital to the the multinational corporation like with the East India Company for example where suddenly this is faceless corporation which has no moral tie to the people in which it's employing or exploiting or whatever else and in that form of capital is very different to the form of capital which Adam Smith was arguing about with the Adam Smith Invisible Hand so in what I was so what I'm saying is in Bitcoin for example an innoster if me running a Bitcoin company tries to co-opt the Bitcoin protocol and co-opt that commons I will get bitch slapped by the community so it's very important that free and open source community exists building that commons I will get that bitch like and that's the Adam Smith Invisible Hand bitch slap to keep everyone in check and that's what I want to see I want to see these things turn into commons whatever one can operate and then if anyone tries to co-opt it they get the they get the bitch slapped just as someone like a Roger Ver had back in the day but yeah it's my new economic theory it's called the Adam Smith Invisible Bitch Hand slap and I'll write one of them Bitcoin books and sell it everywhere all the Bitcoin conferences unfortunately what we've seen Ben is that the Facebook's and other people use the work of the open source programmers they use the work of these open collectives they steal it and they make their walled gardens better the specific example recently Facebook needed to scan a bunch of books they were trying to work with the publishers the publishers were sending the books very slowly the Facebook engineers said hey look at this community created group of pirates who have created Libgen incredible library of books let's just use that and they say according to the articles allegedly and so forth that the chain of decision goes all the way up to MZ and that MZ Mark Zuckerberg himself approved for the Facebook engineers to steal the work of the pirates and to steal the work of the authors who wrote the books and to scan them to make their own a i so that they could make billions and billions of dollars so once again these these companies will use the open source program as they will use the pirates they will use the commons and they will line their own pockets and again Instagram was the competitor Instagram was the competitor to Facebook where you could put up your photos that had a network effect that was growing that could have expanded their services but never did and won't now because they've been owned what's app was the competitor for Facebook it had a network effect people were using it to communicate they could have added services commute and competed with Facebook they never will now because they're owned by Facebook they're eating the competitors it is whether or not similar to Bitcoin and fear the very fact that something like nostruzists means that over time there'll be the dialectic between those two forms of private capital and over time the free and open source permissionless development environment the commons will has properties which you just simply can't compete with just on the amount of development and the amount of innovation which happens in that space it can't compete with it and this is why free and open source always wins no matter what it wins and it's it's storm storm and himself said the same thing so we're about how long the line is if it's like nuclear half death and like the half life and this is this is someone someone's said to Richard storm and someone said to Richard storm and you know it's free and open source communist and he said no it's not communist he said it's it's communist and at the same time it's also like it's it's you know libertarian free capital because anyone can take the software build a business on top of it anyone can but then they have the free and open source commons which everyone the community contributes back to which everyone can can make use of so it's free and open source really is like the best of both worlds like we transcend all these like trivial little arguments and we end up with whatever one wants which is less government you know less with a state and then these these controls in place which aren't operated by centralized points of failure they're operated by the community as a whole in order to keep that commons and that free market free for everybody I remember when Bill Gates called free and open source communist and everyone was so mad and I got this great shirt little printed up by this guy had a copy left thing and I said no we're not communists we're communists communists josh is josh is defending the flames right here in the chat it's all about the calling here in the commons we're running out of time a bender camera turned off FYI but we're going to the end of the show bender you have a prediction or a story of the week go ahead and not really I mean so we're still working on Alan bits for you what we were going to do when rc 10 but we're we can't keep doing these released candidates it's ridiculous because we said that it will be released by now but takes time to get these things right and I feel bad because everyone's been working solidly on it this week but repersonally I've been having to do other stuff within Alan bits on the company side which meant that couldn't actually do much development so yeah I apologize to everyone who's been like contributing and testing the software and I'll pull my thing ground pile in next week all right let's go to josh shagala for a prediction or a story of the week go ahead josh um I predict that we'll hopefully head towards resolving the the crisis in Ukraine and and I hope that we can we can have peace because the last thing we want is people playing with large scale weaponry that escalates into madness I do hope we have peace in Ukraine I remember that of course historically Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons to the United States and the world after the Soviet Union broke down with many peace and security guarantees that have not been met but we'll see how that goes josh we'll we'll see how that goes uh I don't have that much to say today I started a tradition of doing movie reviews here so I'm going to keep that tradition up uh this movie this week's movie is blade uh came back up on the apple tv it was on sale like three movies for ten bucks or something so I pulled it down and uh let me just tell you this is a fantastic movie in many ways blade kicks off the comic book movies that you all know and love the MCU uh but it was just about 10 years before that uh it takes itself seriously it builds a world it seems real the bad guys have motivation the good guy hardly talks it's a great movie check out blade uh wherever you check out movies josh any comments on blade I know you like movies too yeah wow blade that that was uh that was one that just came out of nowhere nice um yeah one one I I really want to rewatch uh like blade it was sort of a classic but not really is is robo cop I'd like to see that again because I think there's a whole lot of stuff in that movie that was predictive and uh and some yeah it interested to enjoy that one again as well definitely recommend robo cop paul verhoven is a fantastic filmmaker and there's tons of stuff in there josh all the stuff on tv there's a recurring uh sit com that kind of makes fun of sit coms where the catchphrases I'd buy that for a dollar I'd buy that for a dollar I think the coolest thing about robo cop was that the way that the bad guy he looked like a geography teacher and it made him so sinister he wasn't let your typical bad guy he was kind of balding had the glasses uh and uh yeah it's a great film great film I have to watch it later on he's the the father on that 70s show and he is pretty foreboating as the father like he's pretty strong on his son uh but in the same way I've seen him in some interviews recently and I think the same thing you thought then if I saw that guy in real life and I'm sorry I forget his name but I would be terrified I'd be like you gave such a strong performance in robo cop I am afraid of you even though I know that acting is not real that's how much respect your performance another another neat thing about the movie blade I was I was thinking about I think this is a year before or maybe two years before the matrix so before the matrix changed all of special effects forever if you watch blade uh I just watched part of it this morning the fighting is all real uh he's Wesley snipes as a martial artist he's a big dude he's throwing people around the shots are all up close it's all square it's not shot from crazy angles there's no crazy computer graphics backgrounds uh it's pretty fun to go back and see how they could do a comic book movie in the real world basically in in a serious way and that I think in a lot of ways the ideas and the success the monetary success of blade leads to the MCU and all the movies that you're probably watching now so go back and check out blade but uh thanks to everybody for joining us still a great chance to give us a thumbs up down below or push subscribe if you're just joining us this week and uh that's about it uh we'll be back next time so until next time bye bye