0:00 Okay, here we are. We made it to another Wednesday, and I took some notes about 0:13 what to talk about, but also we had this tweet about people can comment, which I 0:18 think was a good idea. Should do that more. So I think that is a good... So yeah, 0:28 one person commented on... Well, I'm not sure if this should have like some more 0:31 organization or whatever, but I'm just going to just keep doing it kind of 0:34 randomly. And I'll just talk early on, and then we'll just open it up to whoever 0:40 wants to talk about whatever they can. But one person asked about plans for 0:45 future governance structure, how upgrades will be decided. Thank you. And I think 0:50 this is like a really important thing to explain, because BIP300 is the 0:55 governance solution. So in contrast, when Ethereum launched, it was 1:01 totally dependent on Vitalik, and it had to be built. It was 1:06 completely unfinished. It didn't exist at all. And so when it was announced, 1:13 it didn't exist. And then when it launched, it didn't exist. And then it was 1:16 unfinished for a long time. It's still unfinished. But BIP300 is like a 1:21 completed, completable project. And when it's on, people will be able to add or 1:28 remove different L2s. The L2s will be able to compete for users. So there will 1:34 be some governance, but the only governance, so to speak, is which L2s 1:38 the miner should support. But that is already... I don't want to say it takes 1:44 care of itself completely, but it almost does, because the miners can easily 1:48 support many different L2s with minimal involvement from them, and they collect 1:54 transaction fee revenue from all of them. So they just kind of think, well, well, I 1:57 get a lot more money from giving these people a try. It's a pretty big 2:01 improvement over the existing. Now, the existing thing, the situation would be 2:04 like, you know, Vitalik Buterin running Ethereum or whatever, Emin Gün Sirer 2:11 running Avalanche or etc, etc. You have to have all this work going into it. But 2:17 with the idea behind BIP300, it's just all the people will do the work. People 2:21 want to do the development work. They just, there's no avenue for that, right, to 2:25 actually break through. So, like, when, you know, when Vitalik tried to do 2:32 Ethereum, he tried to do it on Bitcoin first. Of course, Bitcoin Cash people 2:35 tried to do large blocks on BTC first. So, actually, development is not the 2:43 bottleneck. And it's actually not even that. On a relative basis, it's not that 2:49 crucial, because it's not. The issue is not development. The issue is like when 2:55 different developers agree who should win. But with BIP300, you don't have to 3:00 do that. So that's a pretty good comment. A bunch of people are asking about Solana 3:07 eCash token. I posted about this earlier in the week, where the idea, you know, I'm 3:16 not exactly sure because you have to weigh a bunch of different things. But I 3:22 think there could be something where we would exchange the real token for fun, 3:31 sort of Solana meme token, maybe with only like a few people, but they could then 3:37 exchange it to the great masses of people. So that might be an easy way of 3:43 getting it done. I'm not sure if that clarifies at all, but it would be like, 3:47 that would be a fun way to maybe try to get some value into the frivolous version, 3:53 the fun version. So yeah, we had a bunch of stuff. Mr. Hoddle said that maybe he 4:01 would join. He tried to join last time. He couldn't because I'd made Vlad the 4:07 co-host. But let's see. I don't know. We can make anyone the co-host, I suppose. 4:17 But yeah, we had a good, we had a really good space last time. It was slow. It's 4:22 always slow in the first few minutes, but then it picks up. And then usually runs 4:28 over before 4pm. One thing tomorrow, we're going to announce our bug bounty 4:35 contest. Oh, we have someone requesting already. Okay, great. And so that's 4:42 happening. It's also going to talk about how our software bit window, it doesn't 4:49 just work with the hard fork. It also works with regular Bitcoin network using 4:55 the real network and also Cygnet and testnet. So people should try it out on 5:01 that basis alone. I think people don't realize a lot of the cool stuff that's in 5:06 there. But yeah, we have someone who requested to speak already. So JK, 5:15 hello. 5:15 How you doing? Yeah. No, I guess I was just the only thing I could think to talk 5:19 about is how a lot of the chains now are just like pivoting to BitVM, which he 5:24 himself has said is like a worse form of BIP300 and has said we should activate 5:29 it. So like, I don't know, it's kind of an interesting thing that even all this 5:33 fancy stuff on like simplicity and which I'm a fan of, but simplicity on liquid, 5:37 they're still pivoting towards like BitVM. 5:42 That's a very good point. And I think the fact that it's worse, actually, when we 5:47 say worse, we don't mean like, but what we mean is that the creator of BitVM, 5:51 Robin Linus, he said many times consistently, you know, on Twitter and on 5:58 recorded video, and he's insisted many times that we should just activate bit 6:01 300. But he made this weird work around BitVM. And it has many disadvantages. I 6:10 think the point of BitVM is that it's technically complicated. So unfortunately, 6:15 we've had this phenomenon in Bitcoin, where we have like a bad criterion, and 6:21 then it redirects everyone's brainpower into something that we don't need. And 6:28 then since monkey see monkey do since people copy each other, it creates this 6:33 mass psychosis on everyone. So it's actually kind of a very big problem. But 6:39 we're just talking earlier today about silent payments versus bit 47. Bit 47 is 6:44 super, super old. There's really nothing wrong with it. But then people would come 6:48 up with other stuff because they have this weird criterion that you can't. The 6:52 initial transaction can I don't know if people a lot of people know about this, 6:55 but there's this cool idea to get rid of addresses in Bitcoin. So you don't need 6:58 any addresses, you don't have to ask anyone for an address. You don't have to 7:01 deal with people copy paste, trying to steal from you. Super, super old, super 7:07 old idea. And then basically, because of Luke Dashjr kind of ruined it because 7:13 he was saying that it because the first transaction is like a the first 7:21 transaction to someone uses like 20% more space, this is like spamming the 7:24 blockchain or whatever, when really, I think it was nothing of the kind, it was 7:28 very efficient use of the blockchain to dramatically improve bitcoins. You know, 7:33 utility as a as money and as a payment network. But that was like 10 years ago. 7:39 And so now we still have all this stuff and people the point is just to show off 7:42 that you can do a thing. So the point of it is just to show off how technically 7:45 impressive you are. And that's the that's the point of it, unfortunately. So we 7:53 live in a culture where we don't want Yeah, we don't want like the better 7:56 thing. 7:56 I think that they also were like trying to emulate like what they couldn't have on 8:00 lightning. And so they like somehow tried like they wanted like recurring 8:04 payments and things like this, like, which I mean, you should be able to do 8:09 that. And there's a million ways to do it. But they just like tried to emulate 8:13 whatever it is like, oh, we wish we could somehow create addresses that have 8:19 payments sent to them like bolt 12. But we haven't been able to implement implement 8:22 that for years. So we're gonna like, do it on the main chain and then also say 8:29 it's private and stuff like this. I don't know. I mean, it's 8:34 Yeah, unfortunately, I think the the Bitcoin what you might call the Bitcoin 8:38 technical community as a group is mostly hostile to Bitcoin, I think maybe 8:44 without realizing it, but there's a huge conflict of interest between just 8:48 building something that works. And something that works permanently, the 8:52 last thing they want is to solve the problem permanently, because then you 8:56 wouldn't need them to like keep working on it. But with something like lightning, 9:00 and they can always have more conferences about an exotic locations. And 9:05 they can always have more conferences about like flood and loot and blah, blah, 9:08 blah, and how this is how we would fix, etc. So they kind of wanted to be an 9:15 endless make work program. And unfortunately, it's just part of the it's 9:21 gotten so big that we have such a big food chain, you know, where we have 9:24 different people. So some are specialists in lightning, some are like podcast 9:28 specialists, some are like, whatever. And so there's no integrity to the whole 9:36 thing. Like people don't necessarily care. You know, like if your job is to 9:40 just sell a Bitcoin book, you mostly care people see you as an expert. And if 9:46 you sell a podcast, and or if you sell a Bitcoin bar, you don't necessarily care 9:50 about like, you know, whatever. So the technical community is no exception. It 9:53 has a lot of people are just kind of showing up. 9:56 One of the things I noticed is that like, one of the best use cases I've seen for 10:00 the the Fedimint type style of Chaumian mints is like not even related to 10:06 money. It was it doesn't work well as like a currency at all. But using it, 10:11 like in there was something that was put out on like onion routing over 10:16 lightning or something like that. But you can totally remove the lightning part 10:19 from it. And that I realized is actually where all this software is kind of like 10:24 built towards in the vein of some network that doesn't contain money. Because like 10:30 they were using these Fedimint eCash-style things not to like produce tokens 10:35 that people would represent as like coins or something like that, but to 10:39 represent like reputation for spamming and work in lieu of like proof of work 10:44 like the like the tour network uses. So it's like all these things just don't 10:51 factor in economics at all. And if you remove the economics, they kind of 10:54 function decently. But I don't think that people really consider that. 11:00 Yeah, it's like other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play? We 11:06 have like a whole set of stuff, where like, this is a whole set of criteria. 11:11 This is what I was trying to explain before, like, for example, like, with 11:17 ordinals, and with the backlash, and with the OP_RETURN backlash, there's a 11:21 whole cohort of people who think it's bad if you ever use Bitcoin for anything. So 11:25 the hatred of consuming block space, or Luke Dashjr's desire to stop anyone 11:32 from consuming any L1 bytes that they don't absolutely need. That just becomes 11:37 a deranged hatred of using Bitcoin, it becomes deranged hatred of, you know, 11:41 paying the transaction fee revenue to miners. This also happened with side 11:45 chains, where people thought, if if the sidechain pays a lot of money, then 11:50 miners might want to run it. And since they have since when they run the 11:53 software, this costs some money, they thought this contributes to mining 11:57 centralization. And so the argument is, whenever miners can get any more money 12:03 doing anything, this contributes to mining centralization. And a lot of smart 12:09 people believe this, even though it literally makes no sense whatsoever. And 12:11 it's complete nonsense, because it ends up you end up just saying, like, well, 12:15 every time the miners are using the heat to heat a swimming pool, or anytime they 12:21 do the demand management programs, or really anytime that Bitcoin difficulty 12:24 adjusts upward at all, and we have an increase in the security budget, and we 12:29 have an increase in the proof of work, backing Bitcoin, all those things used to 12:33 be good. But now, because you have a mistake, you have a you basically, it's 12:38 like you're doing math, and you dropped a negative one somewhere. So these people 12:43 have like a wrong view. And as a result, it's exactly as you were saying, where 12:48 people have to evolve away from doing everything cool. Like the cool thing 12:52 would be if the VPNs and if all this stuff used actual money based tokens 12:58 instead of reputation, because money is kind of like a reputation, but more 13:03 reliable and more scalable. So the all this stuff would work better if it 13:10 actually had actual money behind it. But instead, it has to evolve away from 13:17 something useful has to evolve towards being useless. So this is just where we 13:21 are. It's just many, there are many examples. 13:23 For the centralization stuff with miners, it's like, I mean, the difficulty 13:27 adjustment, in essence, is firing, like a large percentage of the non performant 13:32 miners. So you would expect that the performant miners would not be some like, 13:38 ragtag group, but actually be like specialized at whatever it is they're 13:42 doing. And so, I mean, I really like the idea that BIP300 is just making that 13:48 specialty away from just burning electricity and towards adding concrete 13:53 value for fees, you know? 13:55 Yeah, exactly. There's this like, it's kind of like very easy to sell this 14:00 notion of, well, hey, anyone can mine like we're all in this together. And 14:06 even the little guy can mine. Which is, it's unfortunate, because it kind of 14:11 sounds a little nice, but it does end up being like some kind of creepy version 14:14 of communism or whatever, where it's like, no matter how underperforming 14:18 people are, they don't get they're not. And it's also completely contrary to 14:21 the design of Bitcoin, which is the difficulty adjustment every two weeks 14:25 resets it to the average. So everyone's who's below average is now unprofitable. 14:32 And it's just, it's very bizarre, because it's pretty basic control. It's 14:36 like a thermostat in your house. You know, as soon as you cross beneath the 14:42 expected amount, you're out because this is the only way to measure the 14:49 thermodynamic, the purchasing power of the blocks and, and you having the 14:55 strength of numbers effect. But yeah, so we have these nice sounding ideas, but 15:03 they're not true. And they're not like necessary. And they're not there, they 15:07 end up being counterproductive, because what you end up saying is anything that 15:11 where even if you're not, you're not, you're not, you're not, you're not 15:15 saying is anything that were even if miners earn more money, in fact, 15:21 especially the argument was, if you could carefully follow it, because it 15:25 which is hard, it's very hard to follow, because it's a ridiculous argument. But 15:29 if you can carefully follow it, it was some miners make so much money from the 15:34 L2 that they might run it, paying a cost that is less than what they're 15:39 earning. Since otherwise, they just ignore it. So it's like, oh, they'll get 15:44 so much money, they're gonna be they're gonna make they're gonna be making it's 15:46 kind of like a Donald Trump ism or something where it's like, oh, they're 15:49 gonna be making so much money. They're gonna be saying, Oh, no, you know, how 15:52 did it ever get so bad? For us? It's like, so then it flips the whole security 15:58 budget thing around, too, because all this stuff was basic before, we want 16:01 miners to collect all the fees, we want miners to collect all the transactions 16:05 into blocks, we want them to collect all the fees, we want them to spend it on 16:08 proof of work so that we have high deterrence for doing all that was basic 16:13 stuff that everyone believed, then it switched at some point, it switched over 16:17 to like, miners shouldn't do anything like miners just shouldn't, they should 16:23 just like kind of be ignored. And this idea that they should just timestamp 16:26 blindly. And I think this doesn't make any correct doesn't make any sense. 16:31 Because like, practically, the only people who are on the pulse of whether 16:36 or not the network and software is running correctly are the miners. That's 16:40 why like a lot of people don't know that there are these like private block 16:43 propagation networks that have to exist. Otherwise, you would get way more orphan 16:48 blocks and like people just like don't even know and like Matt Corral was 16:52 running it for years and now had to spin it back up. And like miners actually 16:56 know what is working in the network and with the software at a real tangible 17:01 level that like, even like an economic node doesn't necessarily need to have 17:09 been understanding of. 17:12 Well, ironically, the the idea of many, like of these Puritan small blocker 17:19 types. And again, I'm an L1 small blocker, and I was and I still am. But 17:24 like some of these people like a Peter Todd, who think that the miners should 17:28 just blindly timestamp everything and that they shouldn't care too much about 17:32 what's happening. This, ironically, they make the exact same mistake that the 17:35 Bitcoin SV people made, which is that if all you want to do is timestamp it, 17:40 everyone can already do that. So first of all, you could use some like open 17:44 timestamps, abandoned by Peter, but you could also just timestamp any other way. 17:49 And you could even like take the hash of a document and like publish it, take out 17:52 an ad in you know, the New York Times or whatever, and publish the hash there, 17:55 this was done, people used to do this. And so if all you want is timestamping, 18:01 that was always allowed. And you can timestamp an unlimited amount of data in 18:04 Bitcoin's blockchain. You can hash you can take Lord of the Rings extended 18:08 edition, 4k version or whatever. And you can hash that and you can put the hash 18:14 in. So if all you want to do is hash, then that's fine. So that was always 18:18 allowed. You know, the people who want the blind timestamp and they want miners 18:21 not to know anything. That's fine. But that misses I think that really misses 18:27 the point is Satoshi's invention. Satoshi's invention was, there is a set 18:31 of data that we have agreed, we've commonly all agreed that, you know, we're 18:39 all going to validate and store and provide and whatever. But one thing is 18:43 that the requirements are, so you got to make it in the umbrella. That's what I'm 18:47 saying. So this is like the when the when the people like Peter Todd or 18:53 whatever, they try to push stuff out of that umbrella, they are just they're 18:59 missing like the point of the invention. And then they make yet another bizarre 19:03 mistake where they say that BIP300 is a block size increase, because someone out 19:08 there might run, you know, the L2 node. But if that's the case, then you know, 19:13 Ethereum is a Bitcoin block size increase and a Namecoin is a Bitcoin 19:17 block size increase. And then they have another bizarre argument like we sort of 19:21 discussed already, which is anytime mining costs go up, that increases minor 19:25 centralization. But if that's the case, then every time the difficulty adjusts 19:29 upward, then so really, none of them have any idea what they're talking about at 19:33 all. It's really been depressing to learn just how like completely confused and 19:38 clueless all of them are. And sometimes even on stage, they ask, they get asked 19:43 basic questions. And so anyway, a lot of confusion out there. 19:48 It just seems that like, there is a sort of like more fatal flaw that is being 19:53 ignored in like the cultural or governance level that like prevents something even 19:57 like CoinNews from being added, which is like a super basic feature, but it just 20:02 has you have to think about the users more in order to add it. 20:08 That's cool. You like CoinNews. I don't know if you and I have like spoken before. 20:12 Yeah, we have. Yeah. 20:14 Yeah, it's CoinNews is my idea. It's completely cosmetic idea. It has no, it is no changes to Bitcoin like the protocol, but just to the front end. And I think it's a really, really good idea. And it's a lot of fun. 20:30 And all it does is if you broadcast an OP_RETURN with, and I had this idea and we implemented this idea long before this OP_RETURN drama and I removed, we removed the OP_RETURN standardness limit, like maybe back in like 2019, I removed that from our, we had like our test Drivechain software that we were just tinkering with at the time, not in that not really taking too seriously. 20:56 But long ago, I was like, this OP_RETURN limit is irrational and a complete waste of time. So all the people who are just learning, if you just learned about it in 2026, and now you have some kind of opinion about it, how it's, how it's bad or whatever, then you got a lot of catching up to do in my humble opinion. 21:12 But what CoinNews is, is you broadcast an OP_RETURN with an unusually large fee, and you have like a little code in the beginning. And again, nothing stops you from doing this now. But what CoinNews does is it breaks apart scans and finds all these messages as they come in, and it sorts them into categories. So you can put them into categories. 21:32 So you can have little categories that people use for mutual convenience, so they don't bump into each other. And then it will sort them based on what the, what fee you paid, and it will display like the little OP_RETURN stuff. So this is a great way of, if you have some news that you want to announce, it's a simple way to do it. 22:01 It's a super cool idea. And it's doesn't involve a soft fork or anything. It's just like a, like a cosmetic thing. And it gives people a reason to run a full node. And makes running a full node kind of fun because you never miss out on the latest news. You know, you don't have that FOMO, because you can only get the CoinNews from the blockchain. So you could theoretically get it from someone else's running a node. But yeah, it's like a cool thing. And you can see these CoinNews. Great idea. Perfectly harmless and fun idea. 22:29 You'd totally expect stuff like that to be added, though. Like, I mean, like, so anyway, that I just was pointing out, I guess that the fact there are nothing like no equivalent ideas being talked about or proposed just kind of shows that they're not really like writing in the business of writing software. But yeah, like being like authorities of some sort. 22:50 Yeah, I'm very disappointed. So we also came up with this thing. This I came up with this a long time ago, maybe in 2019. Also, it's called deniability. And the idea of deniability, again, this is not a soft fork. This isn't any kind of dramatic thing. It's just something in the software where it will schedule a bunch, it will automatically just click like a button. And it will automatically schedule a bunch of transactions from yourself to yourself. 23:20 But they'll look in a very convincing way, they'll look like they are someone spending money to other people and making change addresses and stuff. So it looks like you're getting rid of your Bitcoin, and then you don't have it anymore. So it's like losing it in a boating accident or whatever, except on chain, there's really a transaction getting rid of it. 23:39 So in every single way, it appears as though you sent it away. And you can even like set it to like, do this many times, like, you know, while you're asleep, or it will delay random amounts of time. So like, you can like click the button and go like walking around town. And if the you know, the Russian mafia is following you, or the US government's following you or whatever it is, they're tracking you via satellite, they can see that you're buying ice cream or whatever. 24:07 And just hanging out at the park. And meanwhile, this money is moving around, it looks as though someone else really has it, and they are they are spending it, not you. And this is just a completely clever little idea. And of course, it's a good idea. And it doesn't harm anyone. So of course, it's not merged into Bitcoin Core. And even my friend Alex K, who's the holds the patent on Google autocomplete. 24:29 He was trying to get it into Bitcoin Core, like for years. And I was like, Listen, you don't understand, like, they're just crazy people. And they're not, you know, they don't have any good ideas in. And he was trying, he tried many times to get it in. And then there were people like Luke. And again, I mostly like Luke, but I just think relying on Luke's opinion is a bad idea, because he's very often wrong. And as he was in this case, because Luke was saying, I don't see how that gives anyone any privacy. 24:55 And it was like, well, it doesn't give you like a certain any, it doesn't give you any of a certain kind of privacy. But it does give you some because when now when the people show up, when the whatever the rough Russian mafia breaks down the door to your house, you can just tell them, I don't have any Bitcoin, I spent it all. And they don't really know that you're lying. Now, does that help? To what extent does that help? 25:17 A little bit, not not completely, because you know, they may not believe you. But you know, it does, it is something and all it is, is just a little button, you have to click in the software. And we added that also, that's also in Bitwindow. And you can use that you can use our Bitwindow is regular Bitcoin Core. And yeah, again, this is like, something that a lot of people would like, because it is awkward, like, even when you just get any money from anyone, if you get a large UTXO balance from someone. 25:47 And then you pay someone else, they can see on the blockchain that, oh, yeah, this guy paid me out of like a 50 BTC UTXO, they still have 49.999, whatever. So at that point, many people are tempted to to say, Well, I got to spend this 49 to myself. So it does give me the impression that Luke Dashjr doesn't really use Bitcoin for anything. 26:11 That's the weird thing is that like, I think we need feedback from the actual users, the developers should be serving the needs of the users, as should the miners. Instead, I don't know, we have like, we've lived through like a 10 year period where just everyone is just virtue signaling. And there's very few people working on problems that actually affect them. And a lot of people just want to be like a superstar. Working on BitVM, right? Because of course, who's gonna no one's gonna ever going to use BitVM. 26:40 So no one's ever going to complain, since they will never have any users anyway. 26:45 That's a classic trope in the DeFi space. They used to call it dApps. And nobody would use them except the people who made them. But yeah, no, I mean, I think like certain ideas, like even that are controversial, like Shad and having like, these are actually end up being features like, when you have like, oh, the miner centralization, I think that ends up being a feature. And it's a feature that you can't just add with software, you actually have to make commitments to an entire different 27:14 chain in order to make them. And I think that any significant change is just what is what is being sort of like fought against. 27:25 Yeah, I have a different theory that I've explained to some people about like, we're just living through a period of stasis. And people don't like anything new. And they don't want to stick their neck out. And then they also know, like, it's open season, like you get a hunting license for anyone who does anything different, because then you have the 27:44 it because when anyone when stuff starts to change, every change is inherently like a critique of all the existing people. And so it's like, well, should we like, a lot of stuff's going to change as a result, some people are going to lose status as a result of the change. And then maybe many, many, many people will benefit. But they're not in as much of a, you know, the benefits are diffused and the costs are reduced. 28:14 So, I mean, aside from those, I guess, like opponents of like a fork, like, people like, how would you categorize like, I don't know, Shinobi or like, Cal, any of these people who kind of like, are largely just like, thought leaders type people who oppose changes, because like, I don't know that that seems obvious as to why you would, you know, you wouldn't necessarily lack, like, 28:44 lose your position of authority or something like that to anybody. But anyway, I don't know, this is more so just like, 28:50 Well, I think many of these people, so Shinobi in particular, he was like a chief Drivechain hater for years. So now if Drivechain ever succeeds anywhere, it'll just be, I think, like, very embarrassing for him. And as it should. So he talked a big talk. But of course, none of these people really know anything. Everyone's copying someone else's test. So they get involved at first and they say, Oh, 29:14 OP_RETURN is bad, or BIP300 is bad. And then now they're in too deep. Because they didn't want to have to walk it back. So they just hope the idea dies. This is another part of the bias against change, which is if you if you blockade the change, the experiment is never performed, and then no one has ever proven to be wrong. So that's why it's always a safe option, especially for the cowards. 29:35 I think you asked questions like a series of questions on the mailing list, and like didn't really get any responses. Like trying to quiz people and if they actually understood the idea that they were like, so against 30:05 Hey, test your knowledge. I had like a little blog post about that. But then the other the more important questions were when it's like in 2022, February, I think, people were talking about this and that. And this came up again. And people said, Oh, well, we don't want to do Drivechains because of mining centralization reason or something, or but there was again, the ZMN guy. And he had phrased it like a really, like a bizarre way. So then I kind of jumped in. And I was like, Oh, but that's not true at all. And then he's like, Oh, 30:35 and then people said, Well, we should do lightning instead. And then I asked like, just like two questions or something that were like, actually, by the criterion that you use lightning is like, like 1000 times worse than Drivechain actually by the by your own criterion. And I never got any answer. No one ever known. None of the lightning people ever answered this question, which later became my blog, two months later became the blog post lightning limitations. And that was in 31:05 2022. And that was when it was after I did that. Now, I'm not saying that I'm the solely responsible. And I'm the only one with a brain around here. And everyone else is a phony. But the timing is that I did that, and then published this post. And then they talked about it at 31:21 a conference, or the big conference to a giant room full of people. And then all you started to see all these lightning limitations, panels, and then he had Bitcoin season two, or whatever. So you know, I'm not saying that I'm solely responsible. But I have 31:41 I have seen that, like happen in real time, though, that like, I or somebody else says an idea. And then like, literally, it could be like an hour later, some lightning thing occurs, and they bring up this niche point or so. But yeah, I, I mean, I think I, in general, like the methods of communication have even kind of broken down since I've been like, following the mailing list and everything 32:08 else, like, it's just like, not really the same level of contributions that ever occur, like the discussions that end up being meaningful, like, you can still go back to like Bitcoin talk. And there's more significant contributions there than any anywhere on the mailing list, realistically. 32:28 Yeah, I completely agree. Okay, wait, we had someone request auto incentive, I thought. Yeah, I don't know if it worked. Yeah. Oh, wait. No, here. 32:49 address, which you are able to spend, let's say one Satoshi per UTXO and you have 500,000 UTXO in the address, you are not able to spend them at once. And I was wondering if the new fork will increase that I think it's like 100,000 bytes per transaction. 33:13 You're referring to the dust. I'm sorry, you're talking about if you have many small UTXOs. 33:17 Yeah, it's not many, many small UTXOs, you cannot bind them into a single one by doing only a single transaction. That's a limitation of Bitcoin. I think, like, SegWit has around 60 something bytes. And the new Taproot has like 57 if I'm not wrong. 33:38 I think he's talking about the discount, the witness discount. 33:42 No, no, I think he's talking about okay, the limitation is a result of the fact that there's only so much space in the block. 33:49 Exactly. 33:50 And if you want to use the block space, you have to pay for it. So many of the UTXOs are not economical. And the only way to do that is with more block space. So indirectly, BIP300 does solve that because it lets you escape on different L2s that have more block space. 34:06 And that actually it lets you have different block chains that have different block sizes of all different shapes and sizes. And so in that way, we're all using like we could use different networks. 34:18 So like, if you had like, like a political activist would be more interested in like a small block privacy type network, like a Zcash style network, and then maybe with the coffee payments, it could even be the same person like there could be like a someone who's an activist, they could be paying for coffee using a large block out something that's like a Bitcoin Cash L2 or like a Solana L2 or like a Bitcoin SV L2, something like that. 34:45 They could be buying coffee with that. And then, you know, five minutes later, they could be on a different network, you know, building their flakka empire as they used to call it on Bitcoin Uncensored. 34:56 Um, so that is important that we do that. And people complain about that. Or they say, Oh, that's a, they say, like, well, aren't you just cheating by having all these other nodes that are more expensive. But the thing is, we already have all of that. We already have all of that stuff. So we already have like, you know, like the Solana already exists in the world. So someone's out there running Solana node. So if, if, if they can do if it's not forbidden by the laws of physics, then we might as well make it a Bitcoin project. 35:26 A lot of people miss that. It's extremely basic point, I think. But there you go. 35:31 Basically, you can spin up to I think, like 6000 SegWit transactions for the four megabytes block. But that's, that's not enough if you want to, I don't know, maybe develop a game or something on the network, which is completely unchanged. So it won't be able to do it. 35:53 Yeah, but you know how we will get there, though, is if software continues to improve, if we continue to grow the network, and we continue to grow the economy, then will people get better at writing software over time. 36:06 So like, let me give you I can give you many concrete examples of this, like, one is that bandwidth used to be the bottleneck back in the first block size war. So bandwidth was the bottleneck resource where we could not increase the block size. 36:20 But actually, bandwidth speeds have grown so much that they just passively as a result of increased internet speed. Bandwidth is not the bottleneck. And no one I don't know if anyone has even bothered to check this as recently. But a different, similar related situation is that in 2015, the software was having trouble. 36:40 There was a I think, what was that guy's name? I can't remember. He wasn't. He gave a talk that was like the soft underbelly of Bitcoin. And he was an engineer. And this was like, I don't know, early in the scaling Bitcoin conference era. And they're talking about how it's hard to optimize the software to process all these downloaded process. 37:01 Something like Peter or something, maybe. I don't know. Sorry, who? No, no, no, no, it's a different guy. And I think it was a Blockstream employee, in fact. But so they were talking about it's very hard to optimize the software to actually process the existing amount of transactions. But we ran a contest last summer to optimize one of our L2s. 37:32 And we got it, we got it very, very optimized. And you can see the results for yourself. Just another thing to point out is that like, you know, Solana, when it first came out, they were like, we don't care about decentralization or the node cost. So they were very, very, very ambitious, like what you're talking about, like build a game or whatever on the, you know, fast, super fast block time. 37:55 mempools also. So Solana doesn't have mempools. So it's completely different thing. 38:26 But here's the thing is, they tried that. They probably, you know, cut, you know, they had to cut a lot of corners, take a lot of risks, they probably had to suffer along the way. But then by the time you get to like 2023, the end of 2023, November, I think 2023, I looked it up. And it still costs a lot of money, like it costs like $18,000 a year to run a Solana full node, and you needed like this huge array of like RAM and stuff. 38:51 They, you know, they, they hired a lot of people, and they hired a lot of PhDs and computers improved. And so they got it down. You know, there's a pretty big difference from infinity, because the something doesn't exist. So what's the cost? What's the cost of Starlink in 1885? You know, the year 1885? It's infinity, because you can't get to space. And there's no internet and there's no stuff. 39:15 But I think we will get there to your question of like, is will there be just like, unbelievably, you know, unbelievably high, large block size, or niche or whatever block, you know, a blockchain that could run a game? We I don't think we are there yet. 39:33 But I think we'll get there in like five years, like maybe like, you know, the more people actually work on the software, and the more people actually use the software, more people actually understand the software is like what JK was saying, where no one even talks about anything real anymore. It's all just fake stuff, optics, and, you know, kissing up to people for more open sets grants and or whatever. And so no one's even talking about anything real. 39:59 But if everyone's actually using the stuff and work in engineering, 40:04 it will get there. And eventually, because the hard drives will improve, the bandwidth will improve the RAM, everything will improve. So the CPU, everything will be improving. And so yeah, we will be, we will eventually we'll get to terabyte size blocks, and etc, you know, tiny fraction of a second block times and whatever. 40:23 One of the questions like people were asking me about the fork was like, eCash was basically that, like, Oh, what is like the business use case of decentralization? And this is like something that I guess I also found hard to defend in this abstract sense of like, they were wondering why, even having like, I guess, the most efficient, like implementation, I think of having things be decentralized, and also having big blocks, like, which is what BIP300 does, like, what is even the purpose of decentralization? And 40:53 like, that's just something that used to be sort of like, I guess, assumed that, like, that's the whole goal of the project, the start of it. And I think people selected for Bitcoin because of it. And then it sort of tilted to being like, well, the developers know, and so that's enough. And then I think the developers stopped wanting conversation because they couldn't defend it. But I think the whole point of things like that is that, like, it's an axiom, you're not supposed to have to defend that fundamental of a basis of the 41:22 project. And I think like, a lot of the things on eCash are changing and adding those and reasserting those fundamental axioms, where it's like, sometimes you just have to, like, clear out the people in the room to only the people who actually think and believe that fundamental basis thing. And yeah. 41:43 It's a very good point. Unless you want to say something on incentives. 41:48 Yeah, the thing is, in my opinion, the true decentralization for people is just to be sure that they won't lose their money if something happens. That's the first thing. The second thing is for them to be sure that no one will come and say, you're not allowed to spend this because of this. That's, I think those are the only two things the real user is concerned about when he or she is saying decentralization. 42:17 That's all. The rest, it's up to the devs, I think. 42:21 So maybe if I go into a coma for five years, I must be sure that when I get off the coma, I will have my eCash or Bitcoin or Ethereum or something just to be sure. 42:35 And we can do this with two things, open sourcing the code and allowing everybody to, I don't know, to see the information is correct. And if it's not, to be able to fork the chain and do their own stuff. That's the thing. 42:55 Yeah, JK, you raise a very good point about like, it's very hard to articulate the benefit of decentralization. There's a wide, I think there's a number of different reasons for that. One is that people don't want to say it out loud because, but this is only one. So I think people are sometimes a little too shy when they get to this one. But even though they should be a little bit of shying away from explaining it. But okay, it's kind of a little bit like saying, 43:20 um, okay, it reminds me of this joke from The Office. And I don't know, this is The Office season one, the American version. And there's the healthcare episode. And Dwight is in charge of healthcare. So he, he cuts it and then everyone's mad. So he then adds more healthcare. And then he asked people to write down what, what like diseases they have, basically. And people are like, that's confidential. 43:48 And so it's kind of like this, you can't, the people who really need privacy, they have a good reason, but they can't say it out loud. Because it's a private matter. So for whatever it is, this is an abstract way of kind of talking about it. But, you know, you can't ask people, oh, yeah. 44:09 Like, it's like when the teacher talks to the students and says, Oh, are people afraid? Are people afraid to talk to me or afraid to criticize me or whatever? There's like a lot of things that you just kind of can't, they're just difficult to talk about. And the benefit of decentralization is one of them, because the history of trying to make software, you know, cash on the internet, which goes back many years. 44:34 The issue is that you had stuff like Liberty Reserve, eGold, stuff like that, and Chum, Chum, DigiCash, which was like mismanaged. 44:50 So you had all this other stuff that was like, it fell apart for whatever reason. But of course, Liberty Reserve and eGold, they were shut down, like by the US government. And that's part of why people wanted something decentralized, because they didn't want something where it would be. 45:07 Yes, welcome back. 45:09 I'm back. I got a couple questions. So, okay, great. You said it was important to have it SHA-256. Can I ask, like, do you have a reason why? Like, what, like, why not at this point? 45:25 I got a couple questions. So, okay, great. You said it was important to have it SHA-256. Can I ask, like, do you have a reason why? Like, what, like, why not a different hashing algorithm or maybe even merge mine with Bitcoin itself? Why? Why go through a lower difficulty to preserve the chain? Like, why not just do a merge mine or a different hashing algorithm? 45:50 Well, if you did merge mining, then that would ensure that the coin is not a good competitor, because it has to always keep the host alive. 46:00 Well, how do you explain Dogecoin? Dogecoin is the merge mine with Litecoin. And I'm pretty sure Dogecoin is the dominant chain there, right? It's not Litecoin. 46:13 Yeah, but Dogecoin is helping Litecoin survive. 46:17 Oh, so in your case, you don't want to help Bitcoin survive that this is the dominant chain? 46:25 I think when you, when people step into the ring to compete, that it's, you know, it's inappropriate for them to try to, it's like, what if you wanted to play anything else, like poker, or you wanted to play Warcraft three against someone, you know, you're supposed to help your own side win, you're not supposed to, like, help the other side win. 46:45 So I think, as far as being a competitor, you would not want to do anything that makes it so that because think about it doesn't actually help anyone. Because even if the then the project succeeds, it doesn't, you know, I can't fully succeed in reward the people who believed in it. 47:04 And then even if the project fails, it was kind of like it was never really, there was never an opportunity to I'm sorry, I hit a button. Someone else wants to talk. 47:11 Are you gonna have like a, like a Bcash difficulty adjustment to like, what levels like where do you think you're gonna have enough? Because it's crazy, man, like doing a low difficulty in a world where there's already crap loads of ASICs out there, to me is insane. 47:29 Like, I don't know how that works. Because at any point, anyone could come on the network, and just be the dominant player. And then you got a lot of like, shit to deal with at that point. It's like, why not just be like a CPU friendly coin, like some kind of like, you know, like Monero does it or something, if you want the plebs mining started out a little difficulty, or GPU friendly, I don't know. 47:56 Trying to say why SHA-256. 48:26 I would just stick to SHA-256 is because it would make it so that all the Bitcoin miners out there. They're not victims. If eCash gets really, really big. And they just, if you switch hashing algorithms, and eCash gets really, really big, then all the SHA-256 miners will like lose a ton of money. 48:46 And I don't really want that to happen. And I don't want them to be thinking about after it's proven to be a big success, activating BIP300 on BTC, I'd rather just have them click over. 48:59 I see. So it's about the miners. You worry about the miners. 49:05 All right. Well, yeah, the people basically invested in SHA-256 hardware. 49:11 Right. But I mean, like, how many SHA-256 blockchains are there that they could mine? I mean, back in the day, it was they're basically all of them. Right. And then slowly, but surely started changing hashing algorithms. 49:27 And I remember you had MazaCoin that ended up being merge-mined with Bitcoin. You had a bunch of that. And none of them like they like I don't want eCash forked away. 49:38 So I created a site called fork.lol, where you could track all the double spends. Like, when you will become the minority chain, you are a much less secure chain, like talking about incentives, then like, why wouldn't if this got popular, if this ended up getting some kind of volume on an exchange? 49:56 Why wouldn't a large miner try to double spend like reorg that, you know, the blockchains or whatever, you know, you know what I'm saying? 50:04 Yeah, but you know, it's like Bitcoin SV had less than one half of a percent of the BTC hash rate. 50:12 Well, that's because really, if you only have one node, I mean, like who ran a BSV node, like no one knew anything, no one could sync to chain tip on BSV. That's why exchanges and everybody delisted it. 50:24 I don't know why they listed it. Obviously, I didn't really support Bitcoin SV. But I just know that it had a very low hash. It had a very low price. And so it must have had a very low hash rate. And but it was SHA-256 mined. So yeah, I don't know. 50:43 Where is it today? 50:44 Well, that's, you don't think that's the reason why Bitcoin SV failed? 50:48 Say Bcash, what about BCH? 50:52 Well, BCH changed, but they were SHA-256 mined and they made a bunch of changes. I don't know if any of those changes helped them a lot. I absolutely 100% agree that at first, you won't know, you'd be kind of flying dark. And you don't know what the real equilibrium is. 51:13 Difficulty should be so very, very early on, like when you first launched the project, that will be like a chaotic moment. And I have considered like something where like for the first three months, you could like program in something where it's like you can like manually set the difficulty to something under some conditions. 51:34 And then like after three months, it like deactivates or something like that. This is this has nothing to do with the long run. And this just has everything to do with trying to guess at what the market price will be. 51:46 How does an exchange list that? How many confirmations would you recommend an exchange to consider before a finality? Like, how long? 52:00 How do you get demand? 52:03 How do you get miners mining it if they can't sell it for dollars to pay for the electricity costs? 52:10 Well, I mean, don't you think you're being like, kind of like, you know, it's great to be concerned, but you're like, 52:17 I'm incentivized to see this UTXO as valuable as possible. So like, you say I'm not a fan, but I am a fan. Like, I think the right thing to do is if you want to do something different in crypto, you should fork Bitcoin UTXO set. Because at least this way, you don't get to print your own money. So I think this is the way to do it. Like, I think I wish more people did it this way. I just, I just think that 52:44 Don't you think you're like, maybe you're just kind of assuming it will be like, so like, Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV, they were listed for a while for years on exchanges. And they had, and Bitcoin Cash made it to number two on CoinMarketCap when it like as soon as it debuted in November 2017. So you're acting like this is like a foregone conclusion that it'll be like 53:08 BCH had Roger Ver, he had Bitcoin.com. They had hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing revenue. Like it was, that was a pretty big thing that they did. They lost a lot of money on that. So yeah, I mean, sure, granted, if you could get listed on an exchange at a really low difficulty, and there's buying pressure there, then all right. But the way it is right now, I'm in the opinion of that it's going to fork and not like, like nothing's going to happen. 53:38 Like, it's just it's unless you have some kind of plan to fork away, and have a viable block reward, where exchanges could list it. Like, I think it's, it's, it becomes nothing. 53:52 Well, first of all, we have an L2 that does let you do the exchange, even without. But then also I have, you know, I've spoken to some exchanges that will list that, you know, there are definitely a few that with 100% certainty will list the coin. And I don't know if about, you know, Coinbase or whatever, if they'll list it on day one. But, you know, I barely even started because we just kind of announced it like a few weeks ago. And there's still plenty of months to go. And a lot of people are still just hearing about it. 54:22 For the first time. So I think it's premature to assume either way that the but I know some exchanges will list the coin. Now the question is, you know, who will be buying the coin. But of course, people are already buying the coin now. So I know that there's some demand for that higher than 54:44 You would have to get mined. So like, all right, there's obviously there's replay protection, right? That's a whole new thing. So you have a split. Say an exchange does the split for you. So you already have UTXOs on Coinbase, they'll do the split for you. But what if I don't have Bitcoin on Coinbase, and I just mine some, because it's a little difficulty, and I want to send to an exchange? 55:10 What exchange is going to allow you to send it to it? How many confirmations is it going to take for before they consider that like, fine? 55:41 I don't know exactly how long it will be, but there'll be a problem where the difficulty may not adjust for more than two weeks. So the blocks might be infrequent. And so yeah, there will be like some problems at first, but they're not, they're just related to the difficulty like reaching equilibrium. They're not like, 56:04 I really don't see like any reason to just say this is like a complete disaster. It's really not. It's really not a very important part. This is like a simple detail like there's plenty of stuff can happen in the first week that has no bearing on whether or not the project survives in the long run. 56:26 All right, but say, do you have any plans if say, it is crazy or God, you know, there's a pretty there's like a 5-10 block reorg or something happened where it's just, there's havoc. Are you planning on like, changing the hashing algorithm at that point? Like, are you just going to continue going as whatever happens happens? 56:46 Well, I think we'll learn a lot about how the right way to launch a hard fork, no matter what I do. So people then they can look at it and say, maybe this was the right decision. This was the wrong decision. I mean, if we change the hashing algorithm, that almost wouldn't help because there would still be all this hashing equipment out route that we don't know anything about. 57:07 Yeah, but I mean, like, if you make it a CPU friendly, then you know, it's, it doesn't matter at that point. Like, you know, 57:14 Well, yeah, you buy yourself some time and you kind of reset the clock until people make FPGAs and they make ASICs for that. 57:21 But at that point, the chain is valuable enough for somebody to go and make an FPGA and ASIC, right? Like, if you're not going to start making FPGAs, if they don't think the chain is going to survive very long, but if there's actual demand, and the difficulty keeps going up, and it looks like there's more and more hash power that's being thrown at it, then yeah, of course. That's not a bad thing. At least it's organic that way. 57:44 Yeah, I agree that you would want to make it you'd want it to ramp up, like, in a commensurate way. But where I mean, so for example, with Bitcoin cash, the highest price it had was on like basically on day one, and then it price fell from then from then on. So actually, your theory is that the highest is going to go up 58:05 The highest price was when Coinbase listed it. That was when it went off through the roof. Like that was when it went to like half a Bitcoin, I believe. But again, there was hundreds of millions of dollars involved in that. Like Bitmain and Roger, that was a coordinated effort to get that pumped, especially on fork day. And then after Coinbase listed it, then it went crazy. It went to half a Bitcoin. 58:29 But right after that, it just did whatever the other old coin does. Same song and dance. 59:00 So I'm saying let's imagine there were no exchanges or there were no miners. 59:04 Right. But you're comparing to Bitcoin on Genesis when Satoshi launched it. The problem is, is that mining Bitcoin at that point didn't cost a lot of money. You know, the difficulty was so low that your CPU was not that much money to burn. Now, if you're starting this at a higher difficulty, and there's no way 59:22 No, but we're starting at the low. We're lowering the difficulty. 59:25 Right. But you're not starting it at one. 59:28 Yeah, right. 59:30 You're still going to be starting, you still need to, I mean, it's still going to take power. Those miners still have to pay an electric bill. You have to be able to sell those UTXOs to pay the bill. When Bitcoin first started out, there were no exchanges, but also didn't cost anything to fucking mine the Bitcoin. Like there's no power bill to really 59:50 I know, but think about it like this. It's like, you kind of have it both ways, you know, if, if the price is really low, and the eCash block is not worth very much. 1:00:03 But the difficulty is also low, then it's still profitable to mine. So that particular problem, that's not a problem. But what is a problem is that we're showing up into this world with this, this, this big ecology, where there is all this, these ASIC chips and stuff around. As far as I'm concerned, this is just all this problem is, is just a question of how to actually reach the equilibrium difficulty. And it's totally a temporary problem that can only last, you know, 1:00:33 I would say like one to three months total. And so it is true that this is like a rough, this will be a weird start. It's only a weird, it has nothing to do with the fundamentals of the idea whatsoever. And it has everything to do with turning the project on in a world that already has exchanges and ASICs and pools, and, and kind of like trying to leapfrog the, you know, like, it's kind of like, you know, if you introduced tanks, you know, 1:01:03 people are fighting each other in, in, 1:01:06 in rural Australia with like spearmen and then you just introduced tanks and it'll 1:01:10 be like, it's like a weird adjustment at first. 1:01:13 So I'm open to doing some like thing, 1:01:17 like one idea I had, I didn't want, 1:01:19 I don't want to like just riff off random ideas cause it like makes it look 1:01:22 undisciplined and weird. But, but yeah, 1:01:25 and I am aware of this issue and I think it is, so I think I mentioned already, 1:01:29 one of them is like, 1:01:30 you could have something for like the first three months where it's possible to 1:01:33 manually set either manually checkpoint and block or manually set the 1:01:39 difficulty. 1:01:40 And this is horrendous from the point of view of that would be terrible as a 1:01:45 long run to rely on in the long run, it would be horrible. 1:01:50 But in just in terms of figuring out like what should the difficulty actually be 1:01:53 in a world where no one knows, it's not the worst idea. 1:01:56 A different idea would be to like limit Bitcoin has these guardrails on how much 1:01:59 the difficulty can adjust and you could have like a temporary period where the 1:02:05 guardrails were smaller and this would be like a soft fork. 1:02:08 So instead of being down by a factor of four and up by a factor of four, 1:02:12 you could say the difficulty can only go down by like a factor of like, you know, 1:02:16 instead of going down 25% it can only do it on like 80% like it'll go down like a 1:02:20 little bit and it can only go up like 1.2% or something like that. 1:02:24 So this would still be within the four, four things. 1:02:27 So this wouldn't even be like a hard fork or anything, but this could just like, 1:02:32 uh, well, 1:02:32 I'm not sure exactly how it would work when people tried to count cause it would 1:02:35 be an, it would be an aberrant difficulty adjustment, 1:02:39 but I'm just trying to say it wouldn't be like that. Uh, well, 1:02:43 I don't want to get into like, it's like a complicated type of thing to get. 1:02:45 But so there's a third idea would be to have to try to have viable futures 1:02:51 markets before the fork launches so that you kind of have some idea of what the 1:02:56 price is. 1:02:57 That was a V2X thing. But, and I don't know, man, 1:02:59 I always had a problem of telling people to send UTXOs to exchanges, 1:03:03 to signal, um, you know, your, 1:03:08 that you want the liquidity, man. There's just not even during like, uh, 1:03:12 when Bitfinex did it, um, there's just no liquidity. Like you can't, 1:03:17 it's so hard to like actually determine if there's going to be real demand by a 1:03:22 centralized third party offering a futures market. Like, because 1:03:27 I thought they were very low quality. I agree. 1:03:30 But they ended up being right though. So they ended up, 1:03:32 they ended up saying it would be like 15%. 1:03:35 It was sort of like 15% BCH, 85% BTC. 1:03:40 And that ended up being like sort of accurate for like, 1:03:42 for a few months. Yeah. 1:03:47 It's always going to change once a month. That was always the case, right? 1:03:50 It's not like any of the prices are stuck there permanently, 1:03:54 but it's still pretty good to get it in advance. 1:03:57 You're just trying to get it in because you see what I mean? If you know, 1:04:00 if you know one month in advance, what the price will be, hypothetically, 1:04:06 then you could calculate like what the diff, 1:04:07 what difficulty would be really, really close. 1:04:10 And then you would avoid all these problems, I think, 1:04:12 because it would turn on and it would be moderately profitable. 1:04:15 Some people would switch over. Some people would not. Um, 1:04:21 so what about the difficulty, the difficulty adjustment algorithm? 1:04:24 Are you doing any tweaks to that or just keeping that vanilla the way it is? 1:04:29 Talked about some, I would, obviously I would prefer not to, uh, at all. 1:04:34 And I think maybe embrace the chaos would be more, 1:04:37 more fun and more interesting. Uh, but that being said, um, 1:04:42 uh, yeah, if I did anything, 1:04:43 it would be like something that where after three months it automatically times 1:04:47 out because it's not, it has nothing to do with 1:04:51 like the, the system doesn't need it in the long run, but it just needs it to, 1:04:56 it's just a question of turning it on for the first time. 1:04:59 And you have to like guess at some things, you know what I mean? It's like, uh, 1:05:03 you're going to turn it on and you don't know what the price will be and what, 1:05:07 who will mine it. 1:05:09 After three months, if everything like 2016 blocks is that's, that's, 1:05:13 that numbers will stay the same, right? 1:05:16 Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Um, all right. 1:05:20 So that everything will know one should be exactly the same and to the extent 1:05:24 it's not, it would just be this temporary thing involving the launch, 1:05:28 which is unfortunate. But of course, when you first create it, you have just, 1:05:31 yeah, it's going from zero. 1:05:33 You have to do something. 1:05:34 You have to loosen some type of rules in order for that chain to come alive. 1:05:37 I'm with you. Um, the other thing, the name, 1:05:42 the name, man, you re you, 1:05:44 you know that there is already a project called eCash, like why, why eCash? 1:05:48 Why, why not? 1:05:52 Well, of course I'm, I was, I considered a lot of different names, but yeah, 1:05:55 eCash.com was available. So I got it. 1:05:57 And I looked up all the existing eCash projects. 1:05:59 I thought they're actually all terrible. 1:06:01 So I thought no one's actually muscling in on the name actually. 1:06:06 So I thought all the contenders for the name are super, super weak. 1:06:09 You could get eCash.com, eCash is a great name. So, you know, 1:06:13 it's, it's actually in the white paper, peer-to-peer electronic cash. 1:06:17 So I thought that was kind of funny. It's too, it's easy to pronounce. 1:06:20 It's easy to spell. So it's a great name. 1:06:24 I completely disagree with the idea that if a generic name like eCash, 1:06:27 like something like email or like e-bike or e-reader or 1:06:32 something like, I don't, I completely disagree with this. Like a first, 1:06:35 first come first serve, uh, you call dibs or something. I think that's, 1:06:40 I can't even believe that people are even talking like, 1:06:43 as if that's a serious point, uh, someone, you know, 1:06:48 I think, um, 1:06:49 Bitcoin hodlers that have UTXOs would probably appreciate if it 1:06:55 was a different name. But let's say, I mean, it's your project. 1:06:56 You can do whatever you want. You like eCash or t-cash, whatever. Um, 1:07:01 what else there's old things. 1:07:03 I mean, you're not referring to Callie's project, are you? 1:07:06 I mean, I particularly don't have a use for eCash. Um, 1:07:12 like, you know, I, I think that project is horrendous. 1:07:16 Out of all the different e-cashes that, 1:07:17 that is the one of the most horrendous of them all. 1:07:19 Which one are you referring? I mean, 1:07:21 that's the only one that I'm actually that's in my cycle. 1:07:24 Well, technically all the Fedimint, 1:07:25 all the Fedimint stuff is also like eCash theoretically. 1:07:29 Yeah. I mean, it's similar to that also. 1:07:32 So I think they have described it also as, but yeah, I think the original, 1:07:37 when you had David Choum, uh, when you had like these custodial, 1:07:43 the problem is the custodial, 1:07:44 like just leads to everyone lying to themselves about everything else. 1:07:46 So it just creates a giant metastasizing cancer of lies. 1:07:51 The idea is that you get privacy, right? Like you actually get a dollar bill, 1:07:54 a digital dollar bill, 1:07:56 and you could treat it like a physical dollar bill that you have in your pocket. 1:08:00 You don't get it though. It's custodial. So you don't, 1:08:02 you never actually obtain it. 1:08:03 I mean, you don't really get the dollars either. 1:08:05 That dollar could be devalued to zero, right? So you always, 1:08:08 there's always a trusted third party when it comes to cash. 1:08:11 Well, that's a good point. But, uh, I don't think, you know, 1:08:15 with the whole point with Bitcoin, 1:08:17 it's like the assertion with the Chowmian Bitcoin is that you're getting 1:08:21 Bitcoin though. So that's not quite the same, 1:08:24 but I mean, the name, the name is not as important. Um, 1:08:27 I just want to see this thing take off, man. And just like, 1:08:29 I don't know if the way it is right now, 1:08:33 like if it has any chance of really taking it off or like other than like, 1:08:37 you know, just some kind of like joke thing, like, like Dogecoin. Um, 1:08:43 but I mean, like, I don't know, man, I, I'm a big fan of UTXO for us again. 1:08:46 Like I really think that I wish more people would fork Bitcoin's UTXO 1:08:51 set instead of, you know, printing their own money. Like, I'm not a fan. 1:08:55 The reason I really hated all coins was because I didn't think people should 1:09:00 just print their own fucking money. 1:09:01 Like that's not something that I was ever a fan of. 1:09:04 I have one question for you or anybody, I guess. Like, 1:09:07 do you think if it opens just like, I'm just throwing numbers out there, 1:09:09 like at a thousand dollars at the fork date does thousand dollars, 1:09:15 whatever it falls, does it fall a thousand dollars or does it, 1:09:19 does it raise the, how does it impact it? 1:09:22 You got to worry about the BTC ratio, the old BTC ratio, 1:09:26 not so much the dollar ratio. Cause the dollar ratio, I mean, 1:09:29 it's part of the Bitcoin ecosystem, 1:09:32 but like you really have to look at that BTC alt ratio in order for this to make 1:09:36 sense. So like, it all depends on what it falls against Bitcoin. 1:09:41 Not really because there's gonna be no liquidity for like when you price it in 1:09:44 dollars. I mean, it's not going to tell you much, but um, 1:09:49 when you, uh, when you price it in BTC, it'll tell you a much, 1:09:53 much better story. But again, like I want to see this pump. Like I, 1:09:56 I want this to be successful. That's the whole thing. 1:10:01 Also another thing, I got one more issue. You're calling this a hard fork. 1:10:06 And I believe a hard fork is when you lose a consensus rule and it 1:10:11 doesn't cause a split where you actually have, 1:10:13 no, you're right. The problem is, uh, it's all, you're right. 1:10:16 But all the terminology is screwed up, but I actually wrote, 1:10:19 let's fix it, man. You have the perfect opportunity to fix it. 1:10:22 I wrote an essay back in 2016 or something. I think it's about fork tip, 1:10:27 better fork terminology and forks and split. 1:10:29 And unfortunately the language is all messed up. So, um, 1:10:34 I don't know, like, I don't know how to explain it. 1:10:36 I mean like there's, you know, 1:10:37 there's going to come a time where Bitcoin is going to need a hard fork because 1:10:41 the chain is not going to continue. 1:10:42 And anyone that doesn't upgrade will won't have access to their UTXOs. 1:10:47 Right. So that, in my opinion, is a hard fork that doesn't split the chain. 1:10:53 Um, 1:10:54 what you're doing and what other people do when they fork Bitcoin's UTXO set is 1:10:58 you're deliberately causing a chain split. So it's, 1:11:02 it's a deliberate chain split. So like, I just think, um, 1:11:05 yeah, well, some people say it's like a spinoff altcoin, 1:11:09 which I actually think is a decent attempt at explaining it. But yeah, 1:11:13 unfortunately, as I said, that we've had, and I gave, 1:11:16 this is a talk I gave two TabConf's ago about the origin of all these 1:11:21 words, the both the soft fork and the hard fork. Um, 1:11:25 even though we use the word fork, 1:11:28 it describes a fork that does not like a fork in the road that does not happen. 1:11:32 So in every other case, and I had like a tuning for a picture of a tuning fork, 1:11:36 like on the slide and it had like a culinary fork, like with food. 1:11:39 And it's like the fork is always a fork in the road. It's like when you split, 1:11:43 but, um, 1:11:45 these soft fork and hard fork refer to ways of resolving the split into one 1:11:50 history only. And so they always describe situations where there is no, 1:11:54 but this is just the terminology that we landed up with and it's all messed up. 1:11:58 So I don't know how to, uh, fix the, 1:12:02 the culture's understanding of which words to use, uh, which I did, 1:12:06 but I just think this is a good enough word for now. 1:12:08 Also not that big of a deal. 1:12:10 The other question is I'm not really interested. It doesn't, 1:12:13 it doesn't benefit me at all. But why, um, 1:12:15 why start your own chain and other shots of the six chain when you could have 1:12:20 just put Drivechain on like Bcash or something? 1:12:25 Well, I didn't recreate drive changing to help Altcoin destroy BTC. 1:12:30 So I could, but I think they will anyway. So I, 1:12:32 so probably Litecoin will adopt BIP300 on, 1:12:38 uh, I think, um, 1:12:41 I like I'm not sure exactly if I understand the question because it's my view. 1:12:45 Forking Bitcoin's UTXO set to add Drivechains, 1:12:48 why not add Drivechains to already a chain that already like that exists now? 1:12:55 I know, but it's a strange question. Like you think like, 1:12:57 I want to play the Drivechain is like a toy that I want to use and like play 1:13:02 with personally. That's not the reason. 1:13:04 It's a matter of life or death for the survival of the BTC project. 1:13:08 Right. But right now, I mean, this has nothing to do with BTC project anymore. 1:13:11 You're forking Bitcoin's UTXO set. This is nothing. 1:13:15 That lets everyone escape onto a different, like we're on the Titanic. 1:13:20 So what I'm saying is there's a red block chains. 1:13:22 But I'm saying also that people probably will do that. 1:13:27 Like there will be, 1:13:29 so what's the point of you forking? Like what's the point of the fork? 1:13:32 If people are already going to add Drivechains onto these old coins, 1:13:35 what's the point of this fork? 1:13:37 No, but I'm asking, I don't understand the question at all. 1:13:40 Maybe I'm misunderstanding it. I don't know. But why would you even add like, 1:13:46 the reason you're forking Bitcoin's UTXO set is because you want to add drive 1:13:50 chains, correct? Like you want drivechains. 1:13:53 So you're going to have this fork with Drivechains, right? Like that's the idea. 1:13:59 Well, I guess it's all related. 1:14:00 These are different beliefs that are all kind of related to each other, 1:14:03 but I guess that's true. 1:14:06 Okay. So now I'm asking you why fork your own chain? 1:14:10 Why not convince the developers on another chain to add? 1:14:14 Why would that help me in any way? 1:14:16 How would this help you in any way? 1:14:18 Well, I guess we're still pretty confused. I don't know. 1:14:19 Maybe JK can chime in or something. 1:14:21 I think the idea of just like separating certain people who are not beneficial to 1:14:27 the project or like, 1:14:28 don't hold as axioms that like there is such a thing as miner centralization, 1:14:32 that like you're actually creating a new ecosystem and environment in doing so. 1:14:38 But you have the same miners. It's the same, it's, it's SHA-256, 1:14:40 it's the same exact miners. 1:14:41 Well, yeah. You need that. 1:14:42 If you're going to claim to be like the true Bitcoin. 1:14:45 Oh, wait, are you trying to be the true Bitcoin? Is that the idea? 1:14:48 I think, I think that's a part of it. 1:14:49 I don't think it's the whole project like fails or succeeds depending on it, 1:14:54 but 1:14:58 just FYI, 1:14:58 JK is someone who just came up and I made a co-host. 1:15:01 He has some interesting things to say, 1:15:02 but he's not like officially affiliated or whatever. 1:15:04 We're just like hanging out here on the space. 1:15:06 I was just trying to get, you've been like this drive. 1:15:09 I don't understand. I don't understand the question in the question is that like 1:15:13 the question is that like, 1:15:14 you've been talking about drive chasing now for, for a while. Um, 1:15:18 I've been saying like, I've always wondered like if Drivechain is so great, 1:15:21 why isn't anyone else really adopting it? 1:15:24 Why am I not seeing out there in the wild? Um, but whatever that, 1:15:27 then I muted it. I forgot about it. 1:15:30 And now the topic is back and you're forking your own, like your own chain. 1:15:35 You're going to fork Bitcoin's UTXO set. 1:15:37 You're going to create an old coin and you're going to add Drivechain to it. 1:15:40 So why like all these years, why, like why not make a push for one of these? 1:15:45 You were making a push for Bitcoin to add drivechain. 1:15:48 You saw that wasn't happening. So you got tired of it. 1:15:50 And now you're like, fuck it. I'm just going to create my own chain. 1:15:53 But you know, you have already changed that exists. 1:15:56 You have even shot two 56 chains that exist. 1:15:58 Why not convince those developers to add Drivechain? 1:16:02 I know, but you think that I want the Drivechain just to like, 1:16:05 look at it or something. 1:16:06 No, to use, I mean like, well, dude, you're forking big ones. 1:16:09 You can use to make Bitcoin. 1:16:12 What do you think is going to happen? 1:16:14 You think all of a sudden it's going to be thousands of thousands of people 1:16:16 coming on and like playing with the, with the chain and using the tech. 1:16:21 Like you're going to look at it. 1:16:23 You're going to be looking at it just like you're going to be looking like all 1:16:25 these, all you do is look at all the points. What else? 1:16:27 You don't really do anything. You just look at it. 1:16:30 No, I think we have to get to users. 1:16:33 And if we don't have a lot of people using the technology, 1:16:36 then it will fade away and it should fade away. 1:16:39 And we have to get, 1:16:40 I think we can get to 8 billion users of Bitcoin eventually. 1:16:44 And if we don't, and someone else, some other coin will, 1:16:47 and then BTC will go to zero. So I don't, again, 1:16:51 let me try to understand the question more. Like why would I want, 1:16:56 it's very nice. Okay. So first of all, the reason why people are not, 1:17:01 the reason why I think, first of all, many people did add drivechain. 1:17:06 So, but there wasn't, we never put out like an activation client. 1:17:10 And so in that sense, it was unfinished, 1:17:12 even though I think BIP300 is pretty simple because it's just a counter under 1:17:16 the hood that counts to 13,000 over and over again. 1:17:21 So I don't think it's that complicated, 1:17:24 but we never put out any activation clients. So it was not possible for, 1:17:28 and there was never any pull requests to Bitcoin Core, you know, 1:17:31 like even now we have the BIP300, the CUSF activator for BIP300/301, 1:17:38 but like it's, didn't have like a, 1:17:40 it didn't have like activation parameters or anything for like BIP9 signaling or 1:17:44 anything like that. 1:17:46 So what bothers me more than people not adopting it is that people not wanting 1:17:51 to adopt it. I think that's a bizarre thing. So like, imagine that you, 1:17:56 imagine that you discovered, okay, let me give you this analogy. 1:17:59 Let me see if this helps you explain anything at all. 1:18:02 So let's say you're traveling the world and you show up and you're in like 1:18:05 whatever, the Amazon rainforest or something. 1:18:08 And you discover that there's a society there that they, 1:18:11 they kill like 90% of their, their female children. 1:18:15 They saw them in half with a giant saw because they're crazy, 1:18:18 like Aztec sacrifice people. And they're like, this is like, you know, 1:18:23 this is like you walk around and then they're like, yeah, 1:18:25 ever since we started doing this, 1:18:26 our society has started to collapse and our population is in collapse and our 1:18:30 civilization is in decline and we're all dying. Uh, 1:18:34 and what do we do? And you can, and then someone proposes BIP300, 1:18:38 which says, this is a rule. BIP300 says, 1:18:41 stop sawing your own children in half and sacrificing them. 1:18:47 And then someone called Mr. Hoddle says, or Aztec Hoddle, he says something like, 1:18:52 well, have you tried, have you tried getting this law passed? 1:18:56 Like in Mexico city or like in whatever, in, 1:18:59 have you tried getting it passed in Chile or something? And you're like, what? 1:19:04 Like, it's not the, there's none of this is the point. Like the idea is, 1:19:09 um, the idea is a good idea. It's a harmless idea. We need, 1:19:12 we want people to be focused on building great technology and innovation and we 1:19:16 want safe ossification of L1 and we want higher minor revenues. 1:19:20 So the fact that people don't want the idea is almost a bigger problem than, 1:19:24 you know, people not activating it, but there has been, 1:19:27 there was altcoin SkyDoge that activated the primitive version of BIP300. 1:19:32 And then I think Litecoin will now that the CUSF activator is, 1:19:37 and there've been many people, as you know, 1:19:39 who have been interested in it over the years. 1:19:40 You have the LayerTwoLabs.com slash friends list. 1:19:44 You can see a very large number of people were interested in it. Today, 1:19:48 all these people are, we were just talking about people are pivoting to BIP VM, 1:19:52 but the creator of BIP VM, 1:19:55 Robin Linus has always said that BIP300 is better and we should activate it. 1:19:59 So. 1:20:00 So it's not like, it's not like I care intrinsically about BIP300 out of my own ego. 1:20:06 Like I don't really care at all about that. I'm worried about Bitcoin surviving and thriving. 1:20:13 That's what I'm worried about. So why, how on earth would it help 1:20:16 for it to activate on Litecoin, you know, a competitor to Bitcoin? I don't know, 1:20:19 but we had someone join RJ. 1:20:24 You're a direct competitor to Bitcoin now. 1:20:26 Well, yeah, now I want, because we forked the FET. So I'm going to, 1:20:29 I'm going to save the women and children, which is the UTXO set. 1:20:32 And we're going to leave a couple of people behind. I'm going to leave Peter McCormack 1:20:35 and Shinobi behind maybe, and we're going to escape, you know, and this is the best I can do. 1:20:39 You know what I mean? I want to save 99% of the, the important thing is that the project 1:20:45 with all its original owners and the cohort. So basically like, so is that, that's why I don't 1:20:52 Basically, like, so is that, that's why I don't care about like, oh, well, 1:20:55 why don't you activate it on Bitcoin SV or something like whatever? 1:20:59 Like, okay. You know, like that's kind of making my job a little bit worse, I think. 1:21:06 Go ahead RJ, I'm sorry. 1:21:07 No problems. Good afternoon, everyone. And Mr. Voyager, glad to see you. 1:21:12 Paul, I'm thankful that you're doing this because BTC does have a real issue. 1:21:18 But I am concerned why you chose to fork Bitcoin. 1:21:24 Why did you just not come and participate with Monero? We've talked about this before. 1:21:30 And I don't understand why you didn't bring your talents and your, 1:21:37 and your purpose is to add privacy to Bitcoin, I'm assuming, right? 1:21:41 I mean, that's what we're trying to do with eCash. 1:21:43 Correct? Or is this not a privacy play? 1:21:46 This is not a privacy play. 1:21:48 Well, then it doesn't really fucking matter. It's a complete utter waste of time. 1:21:51 There is like a very important aspect of it. 1:21:55 I lost, I lost the connection for a tiny little bit. 1:21:59 Why didn't I join Monero? 1:22:00 Excuse me, excuse me. Let me just ask a question because I'm, I'm happy Paul's trying to fix 1:22:05 Bitcoin. It has a, it has a lot of issues. 1:22:08 Oh, Paul's done fixing Bitcoin. Paul's moving on. 1:22:13 To his own thing. Like Bitcoin's done. 1:22:16 Well, I agree. Bitcoin is done. 1:22:18 Okay. I agree. 1:22:19 And I was wondering why Paul did not join the Monero devs. 1:22:24 All right. 1:22:25 Why did you not do that, Paul? It would be, you would make such a bigger difference in that world 1:22:30 than anything you're doing here. 1:22:32 I'm sorry. They just have too much, they have too much money. 1:22:35 The biggest problem with Bitcoin, it's almost like a government. 1:22:38 You know, it's kind of, you're fighting the kings. 1:22:41 Cause they'll just kick you off the exchanges if you get too popular. 1:22:45 So I don't understand. They're never going to give you liquidity. 1:22:50 Um, okay. It's a good, it's a very good question. I suppose. 1:22:54 I don't know if it, I think, do you think the exchanges, 1:22:56 like it's kind of like a bit of a conspiracy theory? 1:22:59 Like they're just running the show and that they don't. 1:23:01 Yeah. 1:23:01 Uh, I don't know if that's the case because the exchanges can make a lot of money. 1:23:04 If that wasn't the case, Paul, then the Monero would be listed, correct? 1:23:07 Monero is not listed because Monero does not produce much transaction fees. 1:23:12 That's a, that's a bold face lie. It produces more transactions than Dogecoin. 1:23:17 No, no, no. With the exchanges, exchanges. 1:23:21 That's it. The exchanges want to make money. They don't care about what it does. 1:23:25 I think, okay, wait, everyone just be cool here for a second. 1:23:29 I think the exchanges are making a huge amount of money, 1:23:33 right? And they also, they have to interface with the fiat world. 1:23:37 So my guess is that they probably, I don't know, I have no idea, 1:23:40 but my guess is that they probably look at Monero and they think, oh, this is the privacy 1:23:45 drug coin. And they just think, well, they just kind of shrunk because they think, so I think. 1:23:51 But they celebrate the, they, they celebrate the public drug coin, 1:23:55 Bitcoin. Like Bitcoin is the public drug coin. Bitcoin, why are we. 1:24:01 The darknet usage of Bitcoin. 1:24:04 No, what I'm saying is like Bitcoin's reputation, the cypher punks beat their chest 1:24:10 about Silk Road and facilitating drug purchases throughout the, throughout time. 1:24:16 The point I'm saying, Paul, if they, if, if you're no threat to Bitcoin, they'll list you. 1:24:24 The moment you become a threat to Bitcoin, they'll kick you off. 1:24:27 Just to go back to one of the thing about privacy is like, there is a huge 1:24:31 privacy component and adding a Zcash sidechain. Like that is like a major. 1:24:35 Zcash is, Zcash is, Zcash is shielded. It's not, it's not a default trans, 1:24:41 it's not default privacy or anonymity. It's a shielded transaction. 1:24:44 There's other things. 1:24:45 It's not the same thing. 1:24:45 We were talking about too, like one's called a deniability for adding, you know, privacy. 1:24:50 You can laugh, Vlad. I like Vlad down there, even though we might disagree with Zcash. 1:24:54 If you'd like to have the Israeli coin, go right ahead. 1:24:57 Problem with Zcash was the trusted setting. That's, that's my problem with Zcash. 1:25:01 But I have no problem. But why do they get to us? 1:25:05 All right. So the question though, is why don't I work on Monero? 1:25:09 And although I have a lot of respect, a lot of respect for Monero, 1:25:12 I was a big, I was a doubter of Monero at first. And when I say at first, I mean, like 2014, 1:25:17 they went on Chris and Josh's podcast in think 2015, maybe, maybe it's early 2016. 1:25:22 And then they were like, he was like, oh, you know, Fluffy Pony, Ricardo. 1:25:27 He was like, oh, what should I do instead? 1:25:31 And they had no answer because there was no answer because of course, 1:25:35 what can you do instead is if you care about privacy, if you want to do, 1:25:38 if you want to innovate and you want to do something new, 1:25:41 you don't have an alternative because we never implemented sidechains on BTC. 1:25:46 So I think actually with Monero, it's a good thing. 1:25:49 So I think actually with Monero, it's the same. 1:25:53 It doesn't fix the underlying problem, which is that 1:25:56 the developers will disagree over what constitutes an innovation. 1:26:00 And it'd be very hard to resolve that in the future. 1:26:04 So I think BIP300 is better than any. 1:26:10 You want it to be centralized where one person has the, 1:26:13 kind of like the map of the future of it. Is that fair? 1:26:16 No, it's decentralized where no single person. 1:26:19 Right now you have Bitcoin 4 and then you have Monero also. 1:26:25 At the end of the day, someone releases the full node software that everyone uses. 1:26:29 So there's only one. 1:26:31 It's in the nature of the blockchain that there can only be one full node per blockchain. 1:26:37 But that's what BIP300 fixes. 1:26:39 So that re-decentralizes that. 1:26:41 So I think that that's a more important problem to solve actually. 1:26:45 I think Monero and Bitcoin Cash and all these things, Ethereum, 1:26:48 they were just symptoms of the fact that 1:26:50 people didn't agree over what constitutes an innovation. 1:26:53 And they think, is this actually a better idea for some people or not? 1:26:57 So I think Monero is a very valuable project. 1:27:00 And Monero has done a lot of work to beat the net. 1:27:04 The other thing is the network effects are really strong. 1:27:05 So you want to be a part of a project that's going to be the number one project. 1:27:11 And that's where this has an edge, actually. 1:27:14 Even though it's small now, 1:27:16 it has the ability to continue growing without these disputes holding it back. 1:27:21 Because there's a flywheel, there's a ratchet, 1:27:24 where whenever someone invents something useful, 1:27:26 it can escape onto the L2 without anyone holding it back. 1:27:30 And then it can get its own users. 1:27:32 And then all the L2s, they compete in a healthy way 1:27:35 where they try to produce better software and snipe each other for users. 1:27:39 But then they also collaborate in another way 1:27:41 because they have something that unites them all, 1:27:42 which is they all share the same 21 million coin units. 1:27:46 And so that is a better configuration in the long run. 1:27:55 So again, it's small now. 1:27:56 But everything else hits a ceiling. 1:27:58 Because it's so... 1:28:00 Yeah, but it's a good question. 1:28:02 And the Mayor community is the real... 1:28:03 They're sort of one of the last... 1:28:05 There's one of the few people with real users 1:28:08 who actually use the software for its actual design purpose. 1:28:14 John McAfee said it perfectly. 1:28:17 Trading crypto to get rich, that's not the goal. 1:28:23 The number go up theory is complete utter bullshit. 1:28:27 It's not what crypto was meant to be. 1:28:31 This was not meant to be, I buy Bitcoin. 1:28:34 And the funny thing is that what matters in business is absorption rate, 1:28:42 not maximum supply. 1:28:45 So if you have 21 million houses, 1:28:48 but there's always 5 million houses for sale, 1:28:51 just because there's a maximum amount of houses 1:28:53 doesn't mean that value is guaranteed to go up. 1:28:57 It just means that there's always 5 million houses being sold. 1:29:01 And if all you do is tie the value to your crypto, 1:29:05 to the United States dollar, 1:29:07 you're always going to have people selling. 1:29:11 So I don't understand how this bubble... 1:29:17 The only narrative that Bitcoiners have is 1:29:19 there's a maximum supply and all these people are buying it, hoarding it. 1:29:24 That doesn't mean that you get a bid ask price to go up. 1:29:29 That's not how order books work. 1:29:32 Well, I think there's a more fundamental problem, 1:29:33 which is it's kind of like we're climbing a ladder. 1:29:37 Imagine two ladders and one of them is 1:29:42 almost long enough to reach the top where we're trying to get to. 1:29:47 This is like this very old game that they used to make for kids for the computer. 1:29:51 Ladder shoots, shoots ladders. 1:29:54 Treasure Mountain. 1:29:56 Because in one of them there's a ladder that doesn't quite reach 1:29:59 and you have to go back down and you have to go all the way around. 1:30:03 It happens sometimes in video games. 1:30:05 The ladder is almost to the top. 1:30:08 So this is the Ponzi scheme ladder. 1:30:10 And then there's another ladder that actually does reach the top. 1:30:12 So it pays off at the very end. 1:30:14 And so you can look at the ladder as the number go up, 1:30:17 like the price going up, like you're getting closer and closer to your goal. 1:30:21 But the final rung of the ladder is that is actually getting the real users. 1:30:29 So you can get, even if you're not acquiring real users now, 1:30:32 if you are acquiring the real users in the future, 1:30:37 that is enough to make the number go up today. 1:30:41 Because you can say, well, we anticipate that we will get these users. 1:30:45 And so the number can go up and up and up and up. 1:30:48 And then you finally cross the last rung and you make it up to the... 1:30:51 It sounds like a VC presentation. 1:30:54 Well, it is. 1:30:55 This is how finance works. 1:30:56 Finance says, basically, that we will be able to add a lot of value in the future. 1:31:03 Because this is part of the beauty of finance, 1:31:06 is that if you didn't have the finance world, 1:31:09 and let's say someone had an idea, 1:31:11 let's say someone is out there mowing lawns. 1:31:14 This is the neighborhood lawn mowing kid. 1:31:17 He's mowing his lawns. 1:31:19 And he has an idea for a better lawn mowing configuration or whatever. 1:31:24 In a world where there's no finance, 1:31:26 he has to personally save up enough money to upgrade his lawnmower 1:31:31 or do whatever it is that he thinks is the most efficient. 1:31:33 He has to personally save it up. 1:31:35 And even if one of the people whose house he cuts the grass for, 1:31:40 that might be an elderly retired man with a lot of cash under the mattress. 1:31:48 He's got a ton of money saved up. 1:31:50 So it's a situation where a young entrepreneur has an idea, 1:31:54 but they don't have time and they don't have money, 1:31:56 and they can't take them a while to save it up. 1:31:58 And we have an old man who has money, but he's not getting a return on it. 1:32:02 It's just sitting there doing nothing. 1:32:04 And finance lets you manipulate space and time and say, 1:32:09 well, listen, I'll be making a lot of money in two years, 1:32:13 but now I need the money to buy a new lawnmower or whatever. 1:32:18 Blah, blah, blah. 1:32:20 So finance is very useful and it's part of civilization. 1:32:23 So the haters of finance are wrong. 1:32:27 I agree with that. 1:32:28 But how does that apply to what you're building? 1:32:31 Well, I was talking about the ladder and the rung. 1:32:33 So I was saying the final rung is you reach, 1:32:35 we have lots of users who are happy with Bitcoin. 1:32:40 And so you can get number go up. 1:32:42 You can get number go up, go up, go up, go up. 1:32:45 As long as you don't have those users, 1:32:46 but you just need to be able to get them eventually. 1:32:49 But if you never get them, then you are in a Ponzi situation. 1:32:53 Yeah, the new users are the next liquidity for the old users. 1:32:57 That's what you're saying. 1:32:59 I'm saying that whether or not that's true, 1:33:01 that all hinges on whether or not we end up getting real users. 1:33:04 So that's why I'm focused. 1:33:05 I try to stay focused on the real user. 1:33:09 That's okay. 1:33:09 I see what you're saying. 1:33:10 So what you're saying is you want to make Bitcoin usable. 1:33:13 So new users. 1:33:13 Yeah, we need real users. 1:33:15 People who pay transaction fee on the network, to me, 1:33:18 that's more like sales revenue. 1:33:21 And the number go up is like saying like the stock price. 1:33:23 All right, we got Sergio. 1:33:24 We got the great Sergio. 1:33:26 Thank you for having me. 1:33:28 No problem. 1:33:29 Yeah, thank you. 1:33:29 Hi, Paul. 1:33:31 Hello, hello. 1:33:33 Hi, everyone. 1:33:35 I have a lot of questions and a lot of things that could be improved. 1:33:39 And I don't know why you chose those decisions. 1:33:43 And I'm going to go one by one. 1:33:45 Maybe you have good answers to them. 1:33:47 The first one is you claim that this fork is an airdrop. 1:33:51 But it's not. 1:33:53 It's something I would call a fork drop. 1:33:56 Because basically, you are not fixing a snapshot of the UTXOs. 1:34:00 You're just those UTXOs are changing all the time. 1:34:04 So basically, it's not like you take a snapshot 1:34:07 and then you give the money to those owners. 1:34:12 This you don't implement full replay protection on both sides, 1:34:16 like changing the signature scheme or a single bidding somewhere 1:34:20 so that there is no possibility of transaction reply. 1:34:24 And that makes it very, very hard for users and for sidechains, 1:34:30 for anyone to claim your tokens without putting their own private keys in danger. 1:34:36 So it's like if we take what you're saying, 1:34:39 like this town where there's women and children, 1:34:41 you want to save the women and children, 1:34:43 but you are telling them, 1:34:44 OK, you have to jump in three seconds. 1:34:46 Two, one, zero. 1:34:47 And if they don't jump in time and they keep transacting, 1:34:50 they actually lose all their eCash tokens 1:34:54 because they didn't act too fast. 1:34:56 So I don't know why you chose to do this kind of fork drop. 1:35:03 OK, but then that's two. 1:35:04 So I think you said you had a few things. 1:35:07 So I guess we'll just do those two first. 1:35:09 So first of all, the terminology as to the fork drop versus air drop versus hard fork 1:35:14 or whatever, I have no idea. 1:35:18 We'll just do it and then people can decide what they want to call it. 1:35:23 They can name it whatever they like, 1:35:24 and I'm not going to try to stop anyone. 1:35:26 But what it is is because it also has, 1:35:29 as you say, unlike a snapshot thing, 1:35:34 we actually have the whole blockchain history also. 1:35:37 So it's not even like we just import the UTXO set. 1:35:40 So in that way, I'm not sure. 1:35:42 It is kind of like a hard fork. 1:35:44 But then Mr. Hoddle was saying, well, it's not really a hard fork 1:35:46 because the old BTC is still going to exist. 1:35:48 So I don't know. 1:35:49 Maybe I think we just need new words for all these things 1:35:51 because the words that we have don't seem to be helping anyone. 1:35:54 But even though the word situation is screwed up, 1:35:57 people seem to understand what's happening anyway. 1:36:00 So we should write to the dictionary and ask for some better words. 1:36:07 But yeah, I don't know exactly what the perfect word would be. 1:36:10 But it is an intentional split off of BTC 1:36:17 where everyone gets more coins. 1:36:19 All BTC owners get more coins. 1:36:22 So the replay protection, it's interesting. 1:36:28 Everyone has a lot of different views on this. 1:36:30 And a lot of people seem to want similar things. 1:36:35 The metaphor is very interesting, where it's kind of like you're saying, 1:36:39 I was thinking of it more the opposite way, 1:36:42 where if they do nothing, then they can wait. 1:36:48 And the coins will be, if they just don't move either coins, 1:36:50 then if they do move, both coins will be like a Dropbox. 1:36:55 It's like a Dropbox that's synchronized. 1:36:57 Yeah, if you spend the BTC, then you will lose the eCash. 1:37:03 But here's the point, is you didn't want to leave. 1:37:09 You didn't jump on. 1:37:11 So you missed the boat. 1:37:14 It gives people an incentive to get on the boat as quickly as possible. 1:37:16 Yeah, but that's not always possible. 1:37:19 I'll give you an example of Roostock or Liquid or any, or Citria or any sidechain. 1:37:25 Basically, you have a thousand, tens of thousands of active users. 1:37:30 So either we, I mean, in Roostock, the private keys are not even available. 1:37:35 No one has the access to private keys. 1:37:37 Private keys of the bridge are actually in HSMs. 1:37:40 These HSMs do not handle or backup or do anything with the private keys. 1:37:45 So essentially, if we would like to help the community to split their eCash coins 1:37:51 and give them back to the community, I don't know how, but let's see. 1:37:55 We would need to prepare a hard fork with all the community support 1:37:59 in a very short time just to be able to recover those coins in some way. 1:38:05 Trying to use the existing HSMs to split them will be very problematic. 1:38:11 And even in that case, we wouldn't know who to give the coins to, 1:38:14 because there are some smart contracts that they are the owners of the coins. 1:38:17 These are not owned by people. 1:38:19 These are owned by smart contracts. 1:38:21 So it's kind of a very complicated situation. 1:38:24 And if we don't, I mean, as a community, if we don't split the coins, 1:38:27 then what can happen is like, you know, people can have a run to the bridge 1:38:32 trying to get out of the bridge of the sidechain before this event, 1:38:37 just to claim the coins. 1:38:38 And that would be terrible because, you know, 1:38:40 the bridge has a limited amount of UTXOs that can, you know, 1:38:44 be recycled during the payout process. 1:38:47 So we can have a run to the peg and a de-peg. 1:38:50 So it's kind of very, very problematic for any of these sidechains. 1:38:54 So I'm pretty sure that your woman and children live on the sidechains, 1:38:59 because that's where the Bitcoins are being traded and used for everyday use, 1:39:04 not the Bitcoiners that are holding them in cold storage. 1:39:08 So you are actually hurting the people that use Bitcoin most as a means of payments. 1:39:14 And I really think that's a bad idea. 1:39:20 Well, a lot of that makes some sense to me, but not all of it. 1:39:22 So first of all, as you know, BIP300 works the same way. 1:39:25 Only so many people can come out of the bridge at a time. 1:39:30 I think it's going to be very hard to do like a hard fork, 1:39:35 unless you adopt the principle that says, 1:39:38 listen, we're hard forking the network. 1:39:41 This is the blockchain and the blockchain knows, 1:39:45 the blockchain knows what, who owns which coins on L1. 1:39:51 And now, I have a question for you about like, okay, so in the case of, 1:39:57 you say that there will be no... 1:40:01 Like, could you copy and paste the entire Rootstock? 1:40:07 Like, because what you're saying is there's this situation where there's HSMs that you don't 1:40:11 actually know the private key, but in the L1 Bitcoin blockchain, the coins have been sent into 1:40:17 some script. And isn't it the case that in the eCash world, you can just restart the Rootstock, 1:40:28 you can copy and paste the whole Rootstock universe over there. 1:40:32 There'll be two entire universes of Rootstock and one... Because shouldn't it be the exact 1:40:37 same sequence of messages in both cases? Well, still we have to hard fork in some way 1:40:43 too, because a Rootstock has a Bitcoin oracle. It follows Bitcoin as an SPV client that is 1:40:49 embedded in a smart contract. So it just follows the highest hash rate. So if we want to create 1:40:55 a split of Rootstock that follows another chain that has initially lower or has a hard fork, 1:41:00 then we have to hard fork Rootstock anyway. So yeah, it could be possible to split Rootstock in 1:41:05 two. It would be very problematic because obviously, who is going to merge mine the new 1:41:13 eCash Rootstock? I don't know. We will have to run to find miners that want to merge mine 1:41:20 this other chain. Yeah, potentially it could be possible. But I think it will be horribly 1:41:26 difficult to pull out. Yeah, it might be. Wouldn't it be theoretically the case that you could come 1:41:31 back later and you could say, if you were holding... If you had roots, you could come back 1:41:37 months later. I'm just saying, we're just talking theoretically here. I don't know if it's feasible. 1:41:41 But you could say months later, you could say, hey, if you had BTC in a Rootstock sidechain 1:41:50 in August 2026, there's a bunch of eCash waiting in the parallel world of the Rootstock, 1:41:57 and then we're going to slowly withdraw it all and give it to you. It's not possible, 1:42:01 because if we do nothing, as a community, we'll be under an attack. Anyone can peg in 1:42:08 bitcoins that have already been split, and then peg out bitcoins that are not yet split and cash 1:42:13 out. And I've done some math to see how much money will be there to grab. I don't know, 1:42:19 but wouldn't that be... Okay, sorry, finish your thought. Yeah, so depending on the value of this 1:42:23 new token, it can be a couple of million dollars. Even if the token is initially low value, it's 1:42:31 going to be a lot of money. So I'm pretty sure that someone is going to recycle bitcoins and 1:42:38 peg in, split bitcoins and peg out bitcoins that have not been split and take all the money. So 1:42:45 two months later, there will be no eCash tokens to split. 1:42:51 So what you're saying is... I think so. I'm just making sure I understand it. So you're saying 1:42:56 that they will spin up the parallel eCash Rootstock, because don't they have to do that? 1:43:04 They want the eCash out of the Rootstock UTXO pool. Yeah, they don't have to split Rootstock. 1:43:11 They peg in bitcoins that have already been split, like these bitcoins have no 1:43:18 eCash tokens associated with them. And then they would peg out UTXO that have not moved. 1:43:24 So the Rootstock will find it. Right. Okay. Yeah, I get it. 1:43:28 So you basically consume all the eCash tokens that are hold associated with it. And 1:43:36 this could be prevented if you take a snapshot. So if you take a snapshot, 1:43:40 a certain point in time, then yes, we can do a lot of things with time, trying to find the owners 1:43:47 of each one of these bitcoins or eCash tokens and distribute them. But this way you do it, 1:43:55 we are really pressed on what to do before the split date. 1:44:03 Yeah, I hear. Because the ideal thing I was thinking of is that this does give people 1:44:08 more of an incentive to look into it earlier. So I guess it works a little too well, maybe, 1:44:15 in this particular bizarre case. But I think you want it to be like, if you add... The problem 1:44:23 with adding replay protection is it's sort of saying we have a situation where someone's 1:44:27 indifferent and they haven't looked into the... Well, hey, here's a weird question. Why don't 1:44:32 you just do the drain attack yourself and then you would get all the eCash? You could probably do 1:44:40 it... I don't know if you were technically in a position to do it very quickly before... 1:44:48 Yeah, it would require... Bitcoins take, in the POPEC, which is the current bridge, takes 1:44:55 36 hours to... So 10 hours to get in and 36 hours to get out. So you will need a lot of liquidity, 1:45:02 a lot of collateral to just keep that flowing. I would say in a hundred or several hundred bitcoins 1:45:09 to make sure that you... Yeah, I mean, it could be done, but again, who and whose responsibility 1:45:19 to do that? I wouldn't do it myself because I don't think, from the legal point of view, 1:45:25 whose eCash are these? That's another important question, right? 1:45:30 Yeah, I agree. And certainly it's an unintentional... I certainly had no intention of 1:45:37 making it so... When people have these shared UTXO schemes, the ideal thing, in a way, 1:45:46 would be if there was some kind of... It's kind of hard to explain. I don't know if the audience 1:45:54 will get it at all, but if there was some kind of super replay where it would be aware of the 1:45:59 Rootstock thing so that when the person put a split coin in, it would know that it can only get... 1:46:07 That would be awesome. If you can implement... I mean, we can... 1:46:10 That would be kind of hard. One reason why it would be hard is because you have to go down 1:46:15 the line and figure out, each time someone's sharing a UTXO... Well, this is what the very 1:46:21 first comment I took was about. You have to say, well, the network says these are the owners of 1:46:26 the UTXOs. And then the other stuff that people are saying, like on Lightning or on... It's kind 1:46:31 of like their own business because they've taken it off of the L1 network. And so that's kind of 1:46:36 the contradiction of it. But that would be like the... But you came with a good idea. Let's say 1:46:42 we put an OP_RETURN, let's say OP_RETURN and some specific magic word there. And when you see these 1:46:50 transactions, these are no longer valid on your eCash. That's enough. It could be anything. It 1:46:56 could be an nlock value. It could be just... We actually have that already, Sergio. So I don't 1:47:01 know if you... Because the way we have it set up is that you can disable the replay if you run our 1:47:08 software. So it goes back the other way. So we have this thing where there's like an extra byte 1:47:12 in the TXID that's valid on the eCash world, but not in the BTC world, because it results 1:47:19 in a completely different TXID. We did the opposite. We did something that 1:47:23 existing Bitcoin transactions can have that prevents them from being replayed on eCash. 1:47:30 That would be enough. Well, that's the kind of thing I didn't really want. But I think, 1:47:34 since you can run Rootstock, though, maybe you could make it so that anything that's 1:47:39 pegged into Rootstock... I don't know exactly. You know what I mean? You could make it so that... 1:47:44 There's probably something. We could probably... I have to think about it some more. 1:47:50 All someone told me was that you wrote an article about not liking the... So I was like... 1:47:57 It brings a lot of trouble to our sidechain. That's the main reason. And I have some other 1:48:02 reasons, like grabbing Satoshi coins, but that's minor. I would say that the main problem for me 1:48:08 is the way you implemented replay protection and how that affects the sidechains. That's 1:48:14 the main issue for me. Philosophically, the replay protection is sort of trying to say, 1:48:22 the people who are indifferent and they're not looking into either coin, 1:48:27 they're not trying to move only one coin. So it's kind of like 1:48:33 syncing. It's kind of like keeping the network synchronized and saying, this is actually activity 1:48:37 on both networks. And I'm saying, as soon as someone cares, if you care enough to split the 1:48:43 coins, you can. And if you don't want to split them, then you don't want them. 1:48:51 But there is another way to implement the same logic, which would be to have a snapshot and 1:48:58 allow the claiming time to be six months, let's say. Any number of months, like two, three, 1:49:05 four months. But yet you still have a snapshot. So that would allow us to have a certain amount 1:49:11 of time to do something. At the same time, it would give you this idea that if you do nothing 1:49:17 for three months, then you've lost your access to your eCash coin. 1:49:34 Are you there? Or I lost connection. 1:49:41 It didn't happen. But yeah, I don't know. For some reason, the space has crashed for me sometimes. 1:49:47 So yeah, okay, that's an interesting idea. But yeah, I'm not leaning towards 1:49:56 changing it. But I think there is some way between the splitting tool and between the... 1:50:01 I think there will be some way. I do wonder about the philosophy of it all, 1:50:07 because it's like you're saying... But yeah, it is interesting that you 1:50:15 could just say import this UTXO set, and how would that really be different? And then you 1:50:20 wouldn't have to import 900,000 blocks and all this other stuff. 1:50:26 I mean, to me, it just seems like it's working at dealing with the alternative approach that 1:50:34 other people have used, which is federated sidechains. And that just points out some 1:50:38 of the flaws in that methodology. 1:50:41 Yeah, I'm inclined to say, let's embrace the chaos and just not your keys, not your coins. 1:50:48 It's very ironic. But yeah, I still think about it. But we had a bunch of people who requested, 1:50:55 and now it's already 3.54. Time really flies. So we'll try to get to some more questions, 1:51:03 unless Sergio wants to say... We can... 1:51:05 No, no. I just want to thank you, Paul, for having the opportunity to say 1:51:09 these problems that it could bring to our community. I hope you could address them. Thanks. 1:51:17 Okay, thanks. Thanks very much. Thanks for coming up. 1:51:22 All right, we got a Crypto Voyager again. Hello. 1:51:27 Yeah, hi, Paul. Hi, Paul. I was thinking a little bit more about those things. 1:51:33 Thinking a little bit more about those sidechains. 1:51:37 The only thing connecting the sidechains with each other is just the money. Is that correct? 1:51:46 Well, in my conception, they're all merge-mined, and they have deposits and withdrawals. So these 1:51:50 are the connections. So from L1, you deposit coins into them. So otherwise, the coins don't exist 1:51:57 in the L2, and then you can withdraw, and then they're merge-mined also. Merge-mining has been 1:52:02 around for a long time. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, no, no. I have another question, a few abstract 1:52:09 layers further up. Let's say I have, on one sidechain, I have data, I don't know, some 1:52:19 prediction market or whatever. And on another sidechain, I have... I communicate with proof 1:52:26 of existence, some documents. And then on some other layer, I have something like BitVM, 1:52:32 some calculations. They don't see each other, do they? 1:52:39 No, they don't. But you could build an application that would see all of them. It would just... 1:52:44 That application would need to run a full node of all three. So there'd be like a blow-up in 1:52:49 the cost of full node. But again, we're living in a world where the computers and everything, 1:52:55 and the software, everything's improving. Yeah, but that's the defense that the BSV people said. 1:53:03 Yeah, I agree. They said that hardware costs are non-issue. I'm just... Well, I'm not saying it's 1:53:09 a non-issue. I was just asking. You asked the question about... The point of sidechains is 1:53:14 that they basically allow you to opt-in, like a la carte. So like BSV says you basically have 1:53:20 to eat all the food in the buffet. Like in that movie, Seven, when the guy... They forced 1:53:25 the guy to eat until he died. You have to have it all. And then so like maybe Bitcoin Core alone, 1:53:33 that's just like you only get to eat the soup and the crackers, and you don't get to eat anything 1:53:39 else. Is that so though? So... Well, it's a metaphor. So like... Okay, so here's my take. 1:53:49 Here's my take. If I want to do something like an if-then-that, yeah? There's this web page 1:53:57 that says if-then-that. If this happens, then do that. Then I need to have a communication 1:54:05 to the different sidechains. And the BSV people say, yeah, well, okay, we're going to stuff you 1:54:12 like what you call it, French goose liver, foie gras. Okay? You say, no, that's stupid. 1:54:23 You say that's... Well, it's not just you that say that's stupid. It's all what the 1:54:27 small blockers say that's stupid. Okay, fine, whatever. Okay? Now you say, no, no, 1:54:31 we're going to do it a la carte. But in a la carte, I would have to also again do the foie gras. 1:54:38 I would also have to have the hardware for all of those. You wouldn't in that... Instead of 1:54:43 specializing in my single application and by game theory, be confident that the 1:54:53 transactions providers do have a full copy. And honestly, I don't even care about the full copy. 1:55:00 About the full copy, I just want with... What's it called? With the leaves, 1:55:07 with the Merkle trees and the Merkle trees, just the transactions that are interesting to me. Those 1:55:13 are the ones that I want to copy. And I can then, if they're all on one sidechain or they're all on 1:55:20 one chain, I don't care how you call it, but if they're all in one block, then they can communicate 1:55:25 with each other. I can't do that with different sidechains. You could do that. You could just 1:55:29 run a light client that is able to communicate with all of them and it wouldn't require you to 1:55:35 sync for all of those for the application you described about like... Oh, okay. So there is 1:55:39 a light client for sidechains. Yeah. You can build a light client in any way that cares about only 1:55:44 specific ones if you want. But I thought, okay, so how can I trust that the other guy that has 1:55:51 the full node won't tip me? Well, in the same way that you, if you run a light client for like SPV 1:55:57 proofs on BTC that you have sufficient nodes that you can pick one at random and, or just 1:56:04 not even at random, you can pick one you trust. Like if you would use block space, block.space. 1:56:11 Doesn't that then refute the idea that you cannot trust miners and that's the reason why 1:56:18 blocks have to be small? Well, yeah. I don't think that you need to not trust miners. 1:56:24 That's part of a thing, I suppose. Well, then we could have big blocks from the 1:56:30 beginning. The whole idea of sidechains is that we cannot trust miners 1:56:38 and we have to have a full node of the BTC layer one. And since that goes up, 1:56:46 we need sidechains. I don't think it's 100% right because the miners and the full nodes do 1:56:52 different things. And the way I see it, the sidechain idea says that you can a la carte, 1:56:59 increase. We have the base package, which is the L1, one megabyte Bitcoin Core, four megabyte, 1:57:07 whatever you want to call it. You have Bitcoin Core, small block, that's like the base package. 1:57:11 Everyone has to buy that in order to get, just to get in the door. It's like the cover charge in 1:57:15 the club. You got to pay that to get in. But then you can order whatever, in the sidechains world, 1:57:21 you can order whatever drinks you want. You can get bottle service, whatever. You get VIP, 1:57:28 et cetera. So it's like you can increase. Now, what do you get when you run a full node? 1:57:36 Well, that's the only way of knowing for sure that when you're looking at the actual blockchain, 1:57:45 and that's the way of measuring confirmations that is the most 1:57:50 reliable. If you don't, if you rely only on SPV, you need someone else to be running a full node. 1:57:56 An SPV node that's not paired with a full node cannot do anything. So you are a free rider to 1:58:03 some extent. Now, SPV is a brilliant idea. I love SPV, but we can't have everyone use SPV. 1:58:09 That's like saying... By that idea, then JK's light client is also a dud, 1:58:16 because I don't trust anybody enough to not to use a light client. 1:58:21 Yeah, I mean, maybe you don't. So which one is it now? 1:58:27 Well, I don't understand what you're saying with the... The reason, again, why SPV is not good, 1:58:33 for lack of a better word, because I love SPV. It's a great idea. It's a phenomenal idea. But 1:58:38 we can't build a world where everyone's focused on SPV. That's like building a world where 1:58:43 everyone's on welfare, and no one's paying any taxes. We pay transaction fees. 1:58:50 That's not enough. Someone has to pay the validation cost. 1:58:54 Yeah, that's in the transaction fees. 1:58:57 No, these are unrelated. 1:59:01 I didn't know, because every time I make a transaction, 1:59:04 I just pay transaction fees. I didn't know I paid validation fees. 1:59:08 No, I'm saying someone has to pay. When you run a full node, you pay the validation. 1:59:12 The difference between the transaction fee and the full node is, of course, 1:59:16 you pay the transaction fee. 1:59:18 Wait a minute, wait a minute. Okay, so first of all, I need a clarification. A full node doesn't 1:59:24 mine, is that correct? Yes, right. 1:59:29 Okay, so a full node does not mine. Okay, it just validates. 1:59:35 That's right. 1:59:36 Okay, now if I run a full node, I run it because I'm paranoid. 1:59:42 If I don't run a full node, I trust somebody else to run a full node. 1:59:47 Where exactly do I pay somebody else to run that validation node? 1:59:53 No, that's when you're using SPV and you're free riding. 1:59:55 No, there are 10,000, 20,000 full nodes that are validating, and I'm not paying them. 2:00:03 I know, that's what I'm saying. I'm saying you're not paying them. 2:00:05 Yeah, I'm not paying them. There are millions of people using Bitcoin and only 10,000, 20,000 full nodes. 2:00:13 So as you're saying, we have 99% free riders. 2:00:18 Right. 2:00:19 Aha, and it's still working, and everybody's fine and dandy. So where's the problem? 2:00:26 I completely 100% agree with you in every way. SPV is great. Free riding is great if you can get away with it. 2:00:32 But don't you understand, it's like this. When you're on an airplane, you want the stewardesses to be very confident and very happy. 2:00:40 Yes, I pay them with my ticket. 2:00:42 The pilot and the co-pilot, they should be paranoid because someone has to land the plane, you know what I mean? 2:00:47 Yeah, I'm paying them with my airfare. All those costs are inside. 2:00:53 But don't you understand that if you go into the engineering department, you don't want them just thinking, 2:00:58 oh, everything's going to be fine, we'll just free ride off of someone else. 2:01:00 We all can't cheat off of, it's like everyone in the class is cheating off of one. 2:01:04 No, no, no. When I make a normal transaction on BTC, where exactly is the field for me to pay for the validation? 2:01:13 No, you and I agree that there is no field. 2:01:17 There is no field for validation. 2:01:20 The validators do it altruistically or because they're paranoid. 2:01:24 We could flip it around and say, what if there were no full nodes and there was no copy of the blockchain anyway? 2:01:30 It would be the same way that it was in 2009, when the concept of a full validating node did not exist. 2:01:37 No, I'm asking you right now, let's say that there were no full nodes at all, for mining and non-mining. 2:01:46 And there's no copy of the blockchain exists. 2:01:48 Well, then what's going to happen next? 2:01:50 Well, if the copy of the blockchain does exist, the miners have it. 2:01:54 Everything happens so that you can mine in a new block. 2:01:58 Well, I don't think that's true. Are you like a Bitcoin SV supporter? 2:02:01 Don't shoot the messenger. The messenger doesn't matter. 2:02:05 It actually does matter because I'm just trying to figure out like what... 2:02:10 No, Paul, because I'm asking you questions that doesn't matter who the messenger is. 2:02:15 If you want to go ad hominem, you can go ad hominem. 2:02:18 But that doesn't actually... 2:02:20 It's because the people in a certain group, they all reliably believe different errors. 2:02:25 So sometimes I catch it from Mr. Hoddle and he has a completely different life philosophy than Adam Back or than Lukasz Giena. 2:02:34 Look, look, look, I have... Sorry to interrupt you. 2:02:37 I have a purple hat, OK, which basically tells you that you can put on whatever identity you want on me. 2:02:47 OK, let's not go ad hominem. Let's not say, oh, this guy is from this channel. 2:02:52 I already told you in the beginning a few weeks ago that I really hope that this project works. 2:02:58 OK, because he needs shaking up. 2:03:02 In the Bitcoin, some people in the Bitcoin SV community, maybe not all, but it's actually a myth that the miners need a full node. 2:03:12 And in fact, most miners do not actually run a full node. 2:03:17 So they don't need one and they mostly don't have one. 2:03:20 So the Bitcoin SV idea that the miners will always have a copy of the blockchain, that's not true today. 2:03:26 I mean, it could, it could conceivably be true in a world where everyone expects... 2:03:30 Is it true for the Merkle trees and the Merkle hash that it was once part of the blockchain? 2:03:35 Well, it's... I'm asking you about a world where no one... 2:03:39 If I have data, and I have a question, I have a question to you. 2:03:44 If I have data with the Merkle tree and the Merkle path and the Merkle leaves and all that other stuff, 2:03:51 and the 100 years down the road, we come together and I show you, hey, look, this thing was part of the blockchain. 2:03:59 And you look at the at the current tip. 2:04:02 Will you, will you be able to prove that it was part of the blockchain, yes or no? 2:04:08 We're still talking past each other, because forget 100 years, we're not going to make it 10 minutes to the next block, 2:04:13 unless someone knows whether or not each transaction is a double spend, or a, or something that spends the UTXO doesn't exist. 2:04:22 Because the only way to do that is with the full node is when you have the real copy of the blockchain that you actually have checked everything and you have everything organized into little tidy databases. 2:04:31 So we will never make it. So the full node is a required minimum costs required to view the blockchain and whatever. 2:04:40 And, and so someone has to pay that at least one person has to pay that cost. 2:04:45 And I think it's I personally, this is just a matter of personal opinion. 2:04:49 I think it's inappropriate for the technical people. 2:04:52 This is where I agree with the small blockers. 2:04:54 And I even agree with, to some extent, Greg Maxwell and Luke, Luke Dashjr. 2:04:59 That you like, yeah, the mechanic working on the plane, he should not be saying like, oh, yeah, this plane's never crashed. 2:05:06 It's gonna be fine. And he should be paranoid. 2:05:09 He should check and double check everything. But the stewardesses should really not be paranoid. 2:05:13 They shouldn't be going on the plane thinking, God, is this the time the plane is going to crash into a mountainside and kill everyone? 2:05:19 So I think when you have when you're designing the whole system, you cannot. 2:05:24 The free riding is you have to zoom out and look at all the different stakeholders. 2:05:29 In that analogy, in that analogy, where is the usual nine to five normie? 2:05:36 Is he just a passenger? I guess they would be a passenger. 2:05:41 I didn't really think about it. Do they have to have the full knowledge of how the plane works? 2:05:45 I don't think that's the point of the analogy. But is he then a free rider? 2:05:50 Does he not have then the full node? The people who don't run the full node and they only use SPV, they are the free riders. 2:05:57 I wrote an article about that. We're going to try to get because it's already four on nine. 2:06:00 I'm going to try to get to someone else. But please come back next week. 2:06:04 And also, I wrote an article called BSV, BSV and the data availability problem. 2:06:10 You can read it on Truthcoin.info. I wrote an article article about this topic. 2:06:15 And I did an interview with what's his name? The guy, Kurt. He's very nice. 2:06:19 I did an interview with him about this exact thing. 2:06:23 If people want to learn more about that, then I'm sure you can find it on YouTube. 2:06:27 And I thought Kurt was a super cool guy. And we had a lot of stuff that we agreed about. 2:06:32 And we made fun of Luke Dashjr and his weird idea. 2:06:35 But let's try to get to DecentralizedD. 2:06:38 Ordex.com. 2:06:40 I have nothing valuable to say. I just wanted to come up here and let everyone know. 2:06:43 If you're also extremely fucking confused by what this BSV-er just kept talking about for 20 minutes. 2:06:48 By the way, he is a BSV-er. You can tell by the PFP, Paul. 2:06:51 You really need to step your game up and get your noticing game up. 2:06:54 But yeah, I put a meme up top for you guys. 2:06:57 If you're thoroughly confused about what the fuck they just talked about for 30 minutes. 2:07:00 Just ignore it. It was absolutely pointless. Just check the meme. You'll see what's going on here. 2:07:04 Paul, I applaud you for having to deal with people all the time. 2:07:07 I just want to point out to everyone, Paul is forking. 2:07:09 So he doesn't have to argue with you fucking retards anymore. 2:07:12 So he can just prove it. It works. 2:07:14 And then you guys can come in hindsight 2020 bullshit for the next 10 years. 2:07:17 That's the point, okay? 2:07:20 Small tiny detail. It's just a fucking massive distraction. 2:07:23 The point is staying similar to Bitcoin, guys. 2:07:26 Because it's supposed to prove this works on Bitcoin. 2:07:29 If it goes on Monero and it goes on Litecoin, why didn't you build on Bitcoin Cash? 2:07:34 These are all brain-dead takes. 2:07:36 Justin, thank you for that. 2:07:38 All right, that was fun. Thanks a lot. 2:07:41 Well, that was pretty fun. Okay, well maybe, I don't know. 2:07:44 It's 4-11, so I guess we got Justin with a hand up though. 2:07:47 Maybe we can sneak a Justin in on the last final question of the day. 2:07:53 Yeah, hey, thanks, Paul. 2:07:55 So what exactly is the fee that you are speaking of? 2:08:00 Not the transaction fee. 2:08:05 This is a validation idea that you're talking about. 2:08:10 So the fee is validating the transaction? 2:08:14 I'm just asking. I think that's what you were referring to. 2:08:18 Okay, so there is a transaction fee in Bitcoin because there's a supply and demand for block space. 2:08:25 But separate from that, there are all kinds of other important prices in Bitcoin, like the exchange rate. 2:08:30 It's a completely different price. 2:08:32 But also the full node cost. 2:08:35 This is its own thing. 2:08:37 And it's very important. 2:08:39 And I wrote about it in an article that I mentioned. 2:08:42 It's called BSV and the Data Availability Problem. 2:08:45 And if you look, if you open any piece of blockchain software, including the Bitcoin SV full node, 2:08:50 and I opened it and I took a screenshot of it, and this is how it works, this is how it has to work. 2:08:54 If the node, I'm talking about the full node software, it will request the blockchain from people. 2:09:01 And if it gets a full block, it will scan every transaction in the block to check, 2:09:06 to see that every single transaction is following the rules, that none of them are double spends, 2:09:10 and none of them spend coins that don't exist, or invent coins out of thin air, etc., etc., etc. 2:09:16 So the full node does all this stuff. 2:09:19 And if it requests a block, or if it requests a transaction, this is the data availability problem. 2:09:27 If it requests a block, it says, someone give me block 700,014. 2:09:32 And no one gives them the block. 2:09:35 The full node will just assume that the block is invalid. 2:09:39 It's not going to stay on the fence about it. 2:09:42 It says, no, I'm only going to build on this block if it's valid, 2:09:49 and I'm only going to connect the next block in the sequence to this block 2:09:53 if you can't have an invalid parent for a child block. 2:09:58 So the full node software needs all the data to be available, 2:10:03 and that means that for everything in the blockchain, 2:10:08 the full node must first obtain, must download this data, 2:10:12 it must validate it, and it must store it, and then it must actually serve it back. 2:10:17 And if it's unable to do this, like if the network can't do this, 2:10:21 then the network just stops existing. 2:10:24 And so this cost, which is very low, because software has gotten cheaper, 2:10:29 and bandwidth has gotten cheaper, but it's a pretty low cost. 2:10:32 But this is an important cost to watch. 2:10:34 This is like if you're running a steam engine, 2:10:36 you're running a locomotive or something. 2:10:38 You have all these little gauges. 2:10:40 You'd be like, oh, you've got to watch this number. 2:10:43 And the people who want unlimited L1 block size, 2:10:47 they just say this number can just go as high as you want, 2:10:51 and everything will be fine because miners will take care of it. 2:10:54 And I explained in the essay why that's not true 2:10:56 and why it is, in fact, kind of – 2:10:59 it's kind of like you're relying – this is the Novocaine. 2:11:03 The SPV and this whole miners thing, this is like a Novocaine that it blinds you 2:11:08 to the real problems you experience from doing the work, which is not that hard. 2:11:17 Okay, yeah, so Justin has his hand up again. 2:11:21 So does that make sense? 2:11:23 Yeah, sorry about the background noise. 2:11:27 I think I understand the problem here, and I will read your article. 2:11:32 There is a very real example of this data availability problem 2:11:40 because the creator of Dogecoin, Billy M2K, 2:11:46 before he created Dogecoin, he created a currency that was based on – 2:11:52 it has the name of the currency from Animal Crossing. 2:11:55 I don't recall the name right now, but it was forgotten about, 2:11:59 completely forgotten about. 2:12:01 No one has a copy of that original chain to this day, 2:12:05 and so in 2024 people started mining it again. 2:12:09 Now if you had the original chain, there would be a history there, 2:12:13 but unfortunately no one has a copy of the original chain back in 2014. 2:12:21 Okay, my thing cut out again. 2:12:23 I think there's actually – for Ripple and Stellar, 2:12:26 I think some of the blocks went permanently missing, 2:12:29 and they just kind of just declared we don't care, 2:12:32 and that was something that people made fun of them for. 2:12:34 But I think you were talking about the guy who made Dogecoin, 2:12:36 he made something else, and then they lost some blocks or something. 2:12:39 Is that what you're saying? Could you repeat it a little bit? 2:12:43 Yeah, sorry about the noise. I'm in a quieter place. 2:12:45 Yeah, so he created something for Doge. 2:12:48 I forget the name of it, but everyone forgot about it. 2:12:51 No one mined it. 2:12:53 It had the same – it was the name of the currency from the video game, 2:13:00 Animal Crossing. 2:13:02 And so no one has a – so back in 2024, people rediscovered it, 2:13:07 and they started mining it again. 2:13:11 But from 2014, the genesis block, to 2024, no one has a copy of it. 2:13:22 That was my point. 2:13:25 Yeah, I mean that could be fine as long as nothing – 2:13:28 they're like no important – like if there were zero transactions 2:13:30 during that time, then there's nothing theoretically wrong with that per se. 2:13:36 But yeah, people want – everyone wants something for nothing. 2:13:39 And so we all wish – like I have a metaphor. 2:13:43 I don't know if it works, but in ASA, I have an early metaphor about like, 2:13:46 okay, every child out there, they just want to cry or whatever 2:13:51 until they get some ice cream. 2:13:52 Of course, children are great. We love the children. 2:13:54 But a child, they just want stuff all the time, and they never work. 2:13:59 They want to live in a house, but they don't build a house, 2:14:02 and they want ice cream, but they don't – it's not like they manufacture it. 2:14:05 They don't have a job. They don't pay for the ice cream. 2:14:08 So it's like everyone wants something for nothing, which is fine. 2:14:12 And it's even fine to build it allowing for an efficient quantity of free riders. 2:14:19 So some free riders is just fine. 2:14:22 And I disagree with Luke that absolutely if you have the network 2:14:26 and then you have five people join who aren't running a full node, 2:14:29 it's as if the whole network has exploded and burst into flames and is dead. 2:14:36 I don't have a problem with that. 2:14:38 I mean, I disagree with Luke, and I think that that's not right. 2:14:40 So you can have some free riders, but it is not a good idea for someone 2:14:45 considering the whole system as a whole to just say, 2:14:49 well, we can add lots and lots of free riders who are free riding 2:14:56 on something that's becoming more and more and more expensive over time forever. 2:15:01 It's just going to – endless – the cost will just go up and up and up and up 2:15:05 with no limit. 2:15:07 And it's like in Futurama, thus they drop a giant ice cube into the ocean, 2:15:12 thus solving the problem once and for all. 2:15:14 But then you need a bigger ice cube every year. 2:15:16 So that's not the right way to think about any of these things. 2:15:24 And also it's inappropriate because when you say free riding is the official policy 2:15:32 or you just don't push back on it at all, I just don't think that – 2:15:37 I don't think you want to go down that road. 2:15:40 It's going to go – it's going to lead you to a very bad place. 2:15:43 But anyway, I wrote an article about this, so I'll put it in the replies, 2:15:48 and then I'll have to see everyone next week. 2:15:52 Thanks for a great space, everyone, though. 2:15:55 I'll see you guys. 2:15:56 See you guys later. 2:16:02 ♪♪♪
