0:00 Make sure you subscribe, leave a comment, and like this episode. 0:04 Also, read the new BTC-TKVR magazine. 0:08 This episode is sponsored by Wasabi Wallet, Crypto Steals, Shoppin' a Bit, and SadoDime. 0:13 Thank you for listening. 0:58 Hello there and welcome to the Bitcoin Takeover podcast. 1:10 This is season 14, episode 13. 1:13 And it's the second time in the history of the podcast when I have the same guest in 1:17 the same season twice, because there is something more to add, there's more to discuss. 1:22 And it seems like Drivechains right now are one of the hottest topics in Bitcoin. 1:27 There's something very serious that needs to be discussed. 1:30 And it also seems like the debates are kind of taking place in echo chambers. 1:37 On one hand, you have Paul who's doing like six hours long spaces on Twitter every day, 1:42 but he only gets questions from fans. 1:45 And on the other hand, you have these people who go on stage at other conferences and they 1:49 criticize Drivechains, but at the same time would not have a one-on-one debate with Paul. 1:55 And I'm trying to equalize a little bit this situation. 1:58 And full disclaimer, I'm not getting paid by LayerTwo Labs. 2:02 I never took any money from anyone to interview them. 2:06 I only do this because I'm personally interested and I think it's a good topic to debate. 2:12 And I'm happy that Paul agreed to be here. 2:14 I'm sad that once again, I could not find anyone who wanted to debate him on livestream. 2:20 But I'm going to try to play, you know, because last time I was accused of being one-sided 2:25 and siding with Paul. 2:26 I'm going to try to be more equidistant, if that's a word, in the sense that I will try 2:32 not to be basically his friend. 2:36 I consider Paul to be my friend, but at the same time, I'm going to disagree with him 2:41 today. 2:42 So, hi, Paul. 2:43 Oh, you're muted. 2:44 Okay, here we go. 2:45 I'm back. 2:46 I'm unmuted now. 2:47 Okay, Paul, so since we spoke, there was a lot that happened. 3:00 I think, in principle, I agree with what Drivechains are bringing to Bitcoin, but I disagree with 3:07 the way in which you're presenting Drivechains. 3:10 And I kind of sympathize with you because you have been doing this since 2015. 3:14 And maybe that this is the only way in which you can grab people's attention. 3:18 You got to trigger them. 3:20 You got to make them not necessarily question their beliefs, but you got to shake their 3:26 foundations. 3:27 But I think, to some extent, you are your own worst enemy right now. 3:32 That's a commonly expressed opinion. 3:34 Many people, they were against Drivechains, now they want to weasel out of it. 3:39 They need an excuse. 3:40 So they say, okay, wait a minute, what do I got? 3:43 And they're like, okay, the idea is good, but oh, it's Paul's tweet that one time. 3:51 That was why I was against it in the past. 3:56 Yeah, I'm not going to comment on that. 3:59 I see that you have your Bitcoin Takeover free magazine behind you, which you grabbed 4:04 at Tapcom. 4:05 That's a limited edition, only 75 of them were printed. 4:08 You can show it to the camera. 4:09 I can and I will. 4:10 See, now who's not getting paid? 4:14 It's me. 4:15 I basically told you, you know, show this during the live stream, because I want people... 4:22 Three. 4:23 Three out of 75. 4:26 I got some others too. 4:28 I have this one, which is older. 4:30 It's more OG. 4:31 Oh, oh no. 4:33 You need to talk so that the camera grabs the image. 4:36 Okay. 4:38 I got some other ones here that I've got. 4:41 All limited edition. 4:44 My Bitcoin library, which is extensive. 4:47 So you're the paid shill right now. 4:49 Yeah, I know. 4:50 Who's shilling who? 4:51 No one's ever going to figure me out, okay? 4:54 They're going to try, but they're not going to succeed. 4:59 How many copies of Seyfedine's books do you have? 5:02 Zero. 5:03 I read it in a store, so I wouldn't have to buy it. 5:08 Don't tell him that. 5:11 47 out of 100. 5:14 Yeah, that's from last year at Baltic Honeybadger. 5:17 And I think this is a pretty good introduction for what we are about to do, because since 5:22 we last spoke, there were many reactions and I picked some of them. 5:26 Unfortunately, there is no way for me to go through everything, but I can go through a 5:31 few of them. 5:33 And I think that the panel that took place at Baltic Honeybadger this year in Riga was 5:39 particularly interesting. 5:41 There were people who expressed some more or less negative opinions there, but they 5:48 were not very precise. 5:49 And I think it's fair that you get the chance to refute some arguments. 5:53 You told me that you haven't seen it. 5:54 I haven't seen it. 5:56 I really haven't seen it. 5:59 You're going to have genuine reactions when people say that you're bringing shitcoins 6:03 to Bitcoin. 6:04 Yeah. 6:05 Why do people say that? 6:06 It's not true. 6:09 Honestly, I think, once again, you are your own worst enemy and BIP301. 6:16 You're going to find a mention that says that miners get paid in Namecoin, NMC or something 6:21 like that. 6:23 And anyone who reads that can interpret it as, oh, there's going to be a shitcoin that 6:28 gets issued and the miners get paid in it. 6:31 Interesting. 6:32 That's weird. 6:33 It's the opposite of what it does. 6:36 But, yeah, I thought that, well, see, the thing with merge mining is very few people 6:40 understand it. 6:41 So I was trying to latch on to anything that, you know what I mean, like Namecoin is the 6:46 most famous merge mining thing. 6:49 So I was saying in 301, I say instead of that, we have this, they get paid in L1BTC. 6:56 OK, so while I prepare this, because I want to show it to you so you can comment, what 7:01 is merge mining? 7:04 It's when miners can mine multiple blockchains simultaneously. 7:11 OK, and what's the origin of it? 7:15 Satoshi invented it himself, when Hal Finney and Satoshi were co-inventing a Namecoin along 7:21 with some other people. 7:23 And they invented it. 7:27 Oh, I forgot to show you this, Paul. 7:29 This is the mug from which I'll be drinking. 7:31 Also, I only see you as an image. 7:34 I don't see your video. Am I supposed to be seen as a video? 7:38 Yeah, you should. 7:40 I don't see it at all. 7:41 Maybe my Internet is not fast enough. 7:44 I don't know what's wrong. 7:46 I see my face on the live stream. 7:48 You can see the Blockstream mug. 7:50 So now there is a spoiler here. 7:52 I'm drinking tea from a Blockstream mug, so you know my biases. 7:58 I have plenty of Blockstream stuff. 7:59 I have a Blockstream liquid water bottle. 8:01 I have the hats. I have the NO2X hats. 8:04 I have the UASF hats. 8:05 I should have won the UASF hat. 8:07 That would have been funny. 8:09 But you don't have Sifadean's books, so you're not a true maximalist. 8:15 I guess not. That's the cutoff. 8:17 You have a cold card? 8:20 I actually had some open dimes and some other stuff. 8:25 I don't. I think I do have a cold card. 8:26 Yeah, I think I do. 8:27 And I have like a Bitcoin swag 8:30 like drawer. 8:32 That's huge. 8:34 I think I don't use it. 8:37 Now, anyway, it doesn't matter. 8:39 I was just trying to take shots at them because they always claim that the OGs use cold card. 8:45 You can see here in the abstract of. 8:49 Oh, man, I don't see a black nothing. 8:53 OK, let me read it out for you. 8:56 OK, it says, however, traditional merge mining has two drawbacks. 9:01 Yes. The second one is miners are paid on the other chain in alt currency. 9:07 Miners who MM, as in merge mine Namecoin, will earn NMC. 9:14 Someone who reads this might interpret. 9:17 It's a disadvantage of old merge mining. 9:21 I'm talking about a different thing. 9:24 Yeah, but if someone reads this and has no context, they're going to be a bit confused. 9:28 I know that this is written for developers and the developers who read this are going to know what this is about. 9:35 But I just wanted to point this out to you, that people will interpret that you're bringing shit coins to Bitcoin because they try to read the BIP. 9:43 If they try to read the BIP, because most of them just stop at Jimmy Song's explanations and they end up here and they will say, oh, he's trying to bring Namecoin on Bitcoin and that's a token. 9:54 We don't want tokens. 9:58 Yeah, but the thing about merge mining is it's independent of whether the thing is an altcoin or a sidechain. 10:04 So you merge mining was invented for altcoins. 10:08 I'm saying here is a version of it that works for altcoins or for sidechains that works differently. 10:15 So we already have everyone's already merge mining Namecoin. 10:18 Everyone already does merge mine Namecoin. 10:24 Yeah, that's fair. 10:25 They already get paid in NMC. 10:27 They already get paid and it's already it's been happening for the last 12 years. 10:31 Well, I'm not sure how many miners are still running. 10:34 Well, BitMEX research did an article about this and 90 percent of them are. 10:39 But I don't know if that that's what they concluded. 10:42 I think given that it's free, it costs them literally nothing and they get more money. 10:48 It's only a small amount of money, but I would think that. 10:51 They would do it. 10:55 So what we're about to do next is that we're going to watch the panel from Baltic Honey Badger. 11:00 But I can't see anything. 11:01 I hope it I hope it works. 11:03 I think you'll be able to hear it when it starts. 11:07 Unfortunately, I will ask you to turn off your microphone when you're not speaking. 11:11 So there's no echo feedback, not echo. 11:15 Yes. And before that, I want to mention who the people in the panel are, because it's important to give some context. 11:25 There's going to be Peter Todd, who makes some valid comments, I guess. 11:29 There's going to be John Carvalho, who gives me the impression that he hasn't read the BIP. 11:35 There's going to be Giacomo Zucco. 11:37 My guest, John Carvalho, is on the Unpopular Opinions panel. 11:40 Last year, it was me, Giacomo, Eric Voskuhl and Peter Todd, which I thought that was pretty good. 11:48 There's also Ben Ark, who seems to be the most in favor of sidechains. 11:53 Oh, good. 11:54 And there's also Sergey Kovliar, the CEO of Bitrefill. 12:01 And at one point, he explains. 12:04 No spoiler. 12:05 I mean, I've got no spoiler. 12:07 I mean, Sergey has a real job with real customers, so I preemptively expect him to be more rational. 12:19 He has been saying this for a while, and he said it on my podcast when he expressed his views on full RBF equals one. 12:31 Basically, he said that by making these changes, we are providing more reasons for people to use altcoins because of small fees and for certain use cases. 12:44 It's like, yeah, people are going to use Litecoin or Dogecoin or whatever, not necessarily as a store of value, but only to make this one payment because it's cheaper. 12:52 We can talk about Zeroconf. 12:54 I think we should talk about it because it's very intriguing because I have my views on this have evolved somewhat. 13:01 And now I think they have reached their final form. 13:05 I think this is useful, but first of all, explain what Zeroconf is. 13:09 Zeroconf. 13:11 Okay. 13:13 It's harder to explain if you don't know who the audience is, but Zeroconf, when you send a payment, everyone gets like a notification immediately. 13:20 It says you're being sent money, but it has no confirmations, zero. 13:25 So it's hence the name Zeroconf. 13:28 Now, there's a huge difference. 13:30 This is something I didn't understand when I was learning Bitcoin the first time. 13:35 There's a big difference between having zero confirmations and one. 13:38 There's a huge difference because until you have the first one, the payment can be replaced basically for free and or it's a matter of luck if you broadcast two, kind of as a matter of luck, which one goes through. 13:53 And so there's a huge difference between zero and one, and there's really no difference between like 8,000 and 8,001. 14:03 But as soon as you get the first confirmation, you automatically get anything. 14:07 So it's like it's a big, it's a fight to get on the bus. 14:11 There's only so many seats and you're in line. 14:13 Zeroconf is you're in line to get on the bus or on the train or whatever. 14:17 You get on the train, you get on the bus. 14:19 And then once you're on, the people are fighting over the next bus. 14:24 But once they get on, you automatically go from having one confirmation to two. 14:27 So the only thing that's really at risk, the only thing that's really at where you have a rivalry with the other transactions. 14:37 Is moving from zero confirmations to one. 14:41 And Zeroconf is nice. 14:44 The idea of Zeroconf is the idea that is that you would be paid, the payment would go through instantly. 14:48 And you just think, well, that would be so great if this went through instantly, because that would be so convenient. 14:54 Or but instead, whenever you make, is this making any sense, Vlad? 14:57 It's like whenever you want to make. 14:59 Basically, you're using an analogy that was popularized by some big blockers when they created a mempool visualizer that showed you buses and people trying to get on buses. 15:10 That was a few years ago, I think. 15:12 Yes. Basically, when you broadcast a Bitcoin transaction, it goes into the mempool of nodes. 15:17 Everyone stores that transaction. 15:19 And there used to be a time when people would assume that the transaction is final and the destination cannot be changed. 15:25 So some merchants started accepting that amount as being final. 15:31 It was a social consensus without waiting for the first confirmation just to speed up commerce. 15:37 And people like Roger Ver, I guess, really enjoyed using this. 15:41 And that's why it's in BCH right now. 15:44 But basically, the Bitcoin philosophy is that an amount of money is not yours until there's at least one block confirmation and is not secure until you have at least six confirmations. 15:56 That's the conservative approach. 15:58 And there are some people who pretend that it's fine to have no confirmations because they have a degree of certainty that is going to get included in a block without RBF or any other modification. 16:14 If I were going to steelman Peter Todd's point of view, Peter Todd is the biggest hater of zeroconf and the biggest pusher of RBF replaced by fee, which says if you want to bump your own transaction out, you should be able to. 16:31 If I were to steelman his view, he would say this is inherently insecure. 16:38 So we are doing that we're misleading people if we treat it as if it is secure and we should instead scorched earth, remove it like we should we should say we should remove temptation. 16:53 Basically, we don't want to we don't want to lull anyone into relying on this. 16:57 So we should pull the plug on it, just preempt to rip the bandaid off and get rid of it. 17:06 Yeah, I think for Bitcoin, it's better to be conservative and wait for one confirmation. 17:11 Yeah, but I have a new view, which is that there is a technique that actually is very old. 17:17 But it allows zeroconf to be very secure. 17:22 The technique is it and we can't do it today, you need either liquid or you need you need like some other functionality. 17:31 But any sidechain could easily have it where what you do is you put up some money like $300 or something, you lock it in a special kind of bond. 17:42 And this is a bond and then this thing confirms this thing has like a billion 5000 confirmations or something. 17:49 So it's highly confirmed. 17:51 And you lock up some money over some time. 17:54 And it's locked up in there. 17:57 And what happens is, if anyone whenever you make a transaction, you reference that like insurance, this bond, and then you say if anyone can prove that I double spent, you can take me to court basically and say this guy, he signed twice over this input. 18:17 He spent these coins twice, and it will either it depends on the details, like it destroys the bond or it gives a bond to the miners or whatever. 18:25 So I think it should like freeze the bond for a while and then give it to a random miner or something. 18:32 So that and so now any payment beneath it's like the $300, especially significantly beneath that references the insurance is actually a very secure. 18:42 And they just need to do the normal thing of waiting like 20 seconds or so to see if other transactions have been broadcast into the mempool. 18:51 Because what you can't realistically do is broadcast like 50 transactions, because once they're out, they escape into the world and then they collide with each other. 19:01 And then everyone's software says, Whoa, wait a minute. 19:04 And so the merchant will then they will undo, they'll say this isn't the payment. 19:09 So as long as you're willing to wait like 20, 30 seconds, which is not so bad. 19:15 It's definitely good. 19:16 See, the annoying thing about the 10 minutes is that's 10 minutes on average between each block and no one knows. 19:21 So every time you try to use Bitcoin, you never get that confirmation. 19:26 It's always a 20 minute thing. 19:28 So it's a constant amount of time that is 20 or 30 seconds. 19:33 And this is only situations where where zero conf is insecure, which is a minority. 19:38 Almost always zero conf is secure. 19:40 For example, anything physical where you buy something physically in a store and your face is on like a camera is zero conf is secure, more secure than for the merchant and credit card because the credit card they could charge back. 19:54 And the and then, of course, zero conf anything that's shipped, like you buy something on Amazon, zero conf is perfectly fine, because if they if you if you double spend, they'll just cancel it. 20:05 So there's over on the overwhelming majority of context, zero conf is safe, even like in a case where bit refills, a case where it's not necessarily because, of course, he's selling gift cards. 20:17 So it's a very saleable, very liquid, very liquid thing. 20:23 But if we had this idea and he just waits like 20 seconds or so, then it will it will work. 20:28 So he doesn't need he doesn't need he could upgrade the tech stack. 20:34 And and then this whole debate would be irrelevant because I don't think Peter Todd would be able to claim that it's inherently insecure and that therefore we should discourage it because it would just it would just go back to being secure. 20:49 Well, I like the idea of waiting for at least one confirmation just for safety, but I don't feel like this is the right conversation to be had right now. 20:58 Everyone's waiting for the spicy stuff, but I mean, it is it's tangentially related, because if you have it on a sidechain, and zero conf is secure, then actually the sidechains main disadvantage, which that it relies on confirmations. 21:16 It's main disadvantage relative to the lightning network basically goes away. 21:20 And then the lightning network is just worse in every way than the optional L2 sidechain scaling technique. 21:31 So I think I have a couple of questions before we go to that very much hyped debate that panel from Baltic Honey Badger. 21:40 What is the current state of Drivechains? 21:42 I know that you hired Luke Junior since we spoke. 21:45 And you also commissioned Peter Todd to do an in-depth review and criticism. 21:52 How's that going? 21:53 Well, Peter Todd has for years and years. 21:58 Like since 2014, he said merge mined sidechain, you can search on Twitter and find he says merge mined sidechains were Greg Maxwell's biggest mistake. 22:05 I think he says G Maxwell's in the tweet. 22:08 You can find it. 22:10 And so he thinks this is a terrible, terrible idea. 22:14 But I've tried to figure out why he doesn't like the idea. 22:17 And I have honestly tried to figure it out. 22:20 And I don't know to this day. 22:22 And I think it's all just a fake concern troll and none of it is real. 22:26 But we had a debate at TabConf. 22:28 He was going to we hired him to write a produce a document that says this is the problem. 22:33 You know what I mean? 22:34 Like, this is very easy for me to do that. 22:36 Like, what's the problem with large blocks on L1? 22:39 Or what's the problem with, you know, I did this many times. 22:42 Like, what's the problem with Ethereum? 22:44 What's the problem with the hard fork? 22:47 I wrote an essay, The Case Against the Hard Fork. 22:49 So I'm just like, what is the problem? 22:51 Put it in this document, you know, that has like a beginning, a middle and an end. 22:55 So that it doesn't it doesn't just like this vague notion. 23:00 And he still, this was months ago. 23:04 He still hasn't done that. 23:06 I thought we would do that. 23:07 And then it's part of it. 23:09 He also has to produce this debate. 23:10 And then, you know, in order to get paid the second half, 23:13 we have to go on Stefan Levera's podcast and discuss his complaint. 23:21 But not only that, but we went to the debate. 23:24 We do this TabConf debate. 23:26 Peter Todd is tweeting like the day before, two days before. 23:29 He's tweeting like, well, I don't really know how any of this works, 23:32 but I'll have to ask some questions on stage. 23:35 And so I don't know how to interpret any of that. 23:38 This is why I don't think any of the complaints are just legitimate. 23:41 I just think they're all just, I don't know what to describe it. 23:45 I think it's just like people think the idea is too good to be true or something. 23:52 I don't know. 23:53 Maybe you can tell me. 23:54 But how would you interpret that if someone says this is Greg Maxwell's biggest mistake, 23:59 something that was previously referred to as like the Holy Grail of Bitcoin technology, 24:04 just the sidechain, something that Blockstream has raised all this money to support 24:10 and develop with all this fanfare. 24:12 Remember Brian Armstrong's tweet about altcoins are a distraction. 24:16 Everyone should be focused on Bitcoin and sidechains. 24:19 So this huge idea, and then Peter Todd saying it's Greg Maxwell's biggest mistake, 24:24 and then now he's saying, well, I didn't really know anything. 24:29 I don't understand the idea yet. 24:31 I have to ask some questions on stage. 24:33 So I don't know how to interpret that. 24:35 How would you interpret it? 24:38 Well, I can say that today we have lightning, 24:41 and a lot of people put their hopes in lightning and ARK and all of these second layers, 24:47 and they think that blockchains as a concept should be left behind 24:52 and should only be layer once and that's it. 24:55 I can understand that philosophy, but at the same time, 24:58 I think the best explanation that I read is from Adam Back, who said that everyone deserves to have their own UTXO to some degree. 25:02 And of course, there's going to be a trade off if that UTXO is on sidechains, but still, you're going to be able to store your coins in cold storage. 25:18 Personally, I'm not a fan of the idea that the future of Bitcoin is mostly custodial, and you're going to have these federations and mints and stuff like that. 25:27 I mean, I see the value of that, but it's not necessarily the way that I want Bitcoin to be. 25:34 I think the only problem with that, that would be good enough, and how Finney and others said things like that, but that has a huge issue where if there is a competitor that does not have custodial, a competing coin, 25:53 because now that coin will be the one that does not have the rug pulls and what you might call regulation, compliance. 26:06 So it's ironic that the people who want, they are the large blockers now, the custodial people, because this is what people have always said about large blockism. 26:17 The large blockers said, we don't care how decentralized the network is, as long as it's decentralized enough, and maybe only a few people will be able to run nodes. 26:26 Remember, that's what they said. 26:28 And then we, the small blockers, we said, well, wait a minute. 26:32 If we go down that road, we're going to be competing with Visa, because there'll only be a few big people running nodes, and they will be the only ones who understand the blockchain. 26:45 They'll be the only ones who have access to the UTXO set, and these people all get served with papers or threatened or something. 26:54 So they will go down that road, and those people will embrace compliance and et cetera. 27:02 And not that there's anything wrong with that, but the only problem with that is strategically, it leads us into competing directly with Visa and WeChat Pay and et cetera. 27:14 And that type of thing, we will lose, because the blockchain is an inefficient data structure compared to whatever SQL or whatever WeChat Pay is using. 27:27 So even on a technical level, we could not win if we went that route. 27:31 But if the people who want everything to be custodial, they are the large blockers now. 27:38 Well, to some degree, I don't like that. 27:40 It's the exact same thing. 27:43 I wouldn't make this equivalence, but at the same time, I see that there's a lot of money in custodians. 27:49 Because it's much worse if someone actually is the custodian, like they lawfully obeyed all layer one rules, but they are the rightful owner on L1 of the BTC. 28:01 That's way worse than just having expensive nodes. 28:05 Those people are really going to compete with Visa. 28:10 Also, a final remark that I must make before I start playing that debate. 28:14 I like that in the last three weeks since this talk became very hot within the community, or maybe it's more than three weeks, but I lost track of time. 28:25 My point is that Drivechains find themselves in this paradoxical situation where on one hand, they're not going to succeed because other sidechain attempts have failed. 28:36 And on the other hand, they're going to be so successful that they're going to take away some activity from Bitcoin and make layer one not used anymore. 28:47 Yeah, and also the same people who say, in the same breath, they'll say Drivechain is bringing shitcoins to Bitcoin. 28:55 But then they'll say also, how naive of Paul to think that he will kill shitcoins in this. 29:04 So is it pro shitcoin or anti? 29:07 I can't even tell myself anymore what the critics believe. 29:14 Yeah, some people have cleaned up their act a little bit, but not everyone. 29:19 Some people still repeat the same blatantly untrue stuff, which will be very funny when eventually word really will get out. 29:30 Like every layperson user. 29:33 It'd be like telling people that Henry Ford built a car so that he could tunnel into the earth or something. 29:42 People will just be amazed. 29:44 And they'll go back and they'll read these old tweets and they'll just think, what were these people thinking? 29:50 Something else that makes me think sometimes is that during the last bull market, we had this NFT mania with Ethereum and the fees became super high. 30:02 And people stopped using Ethereum and went to some alternatives of Ethereum and they had their own scaling debate. 30:08 But now they have like free layer twos that I know of. 30:13 There is Optimism, there is Arbitrum and there's another one. 30:17 And they're operational and they have millions of dollars that run through them every day. 30:22 And it makes me realize, OK, all they need right now, because all they care about is fees. 30:27 Right. They want to transact fast and with low fees. 30:30 And they have the second layers. 30:32 They're not super decentralized, so they are bound to get captured by the state if that's going to happen. 30:39 But if they're going to catch another bull run and they're going to have this killer use case that ends up being promoted by Jimmy Fallon and Paris Hilton for whatever reason, there is not going to be any roadblock. 30:54 I mean, anyone from the hairdresser to the taxi driver is going to be able to pay the fees to get on that mania. 31:01 And it's going to be huge and they're going to absorb a lot of fees. 31:05 And unfortunately, Bitcoin is not going to get any of that. 31:08 But we're still going to be on our high horses saying, oh, they're shit coins and they're not selling money. 31:13 And we don't want that. But I guess it could. 31:17 Yeah, they'll say, look, it proves how evil Ethereum is that they could trick everyone into using their software. 31:25 That's what they'll say. 31:29 I don't know. It's just that I wish some use cases, which are not necessarily scammy, would pay fees to the Bitcoin miners and not end up on some other network. 31:41 I mean, to some extent, gatekeeping how you can use Bitcoin is detrimental to the long term success of the project. 31:49 It's overwhelmingly detrimental. It's very detrimental. 31:52 What we should care about is the cost of running an L1 node. 31:56 We should gatekeep that and nothing else. 32:03 Well, there's a cult of people who say that you should only use Bitcoin in certain ways. 32:08 Yeah, but I mean, these same people, they would hold a gun to your child's head and tell you that you should only spend your money a certain way. 32:15 That's a bad analogy. 32:16 But what I wanted to say is that basically, instead of having support for Liquid or RSK, which you are going to argue that they're not real sidechains, and I can agree with that. 32:26 But instead of supporting that, we ended up having WBTC, which is horrible, if you ask me. 32:35 There's Bitcoin.Custody by BitGo, and it's issued on Ethereum so that they can use it for different use cases that are not available right now. 32:45 And people are going to say, no, but there's RGB that's coming and there's also separate assets. 32:50 But the problem with that, and I'm going to end my rant here, is that basically there are people who built stuff on Ethereum and they invested millions of dollars in development. 33:00 And they don't want to port the code in a different language to make it available on a Bitcoin layer where there's not even enough volume. 33:09 If it was possible for them to port it one-to-one, to just copy and paste it somewhere else and deploy it, that would save them a lot of time and money and that would increase the activity on Bitcoin. 33:21 But it seems like people are stuck in this mindset that everything is scammy. 33:29 Well, and of course, they know literally nothing about any of this stuff. 33:33 It's like when they did this to U.S. citizens after our ill-fated wars in the Middle East. 33:42 They would go up to people and they'd say, you know, do you support the war in Iraq or something? 33:47 And they'd be like, where is Iraq? And they have like a blank map or they have like a map with stuff rearranged. 33:54 So they're like, Iraq is on like Australia. And they'd say, could you put a pin in Iraq and these people in America? 34:02 Like on the streets in New York City or something. 34:05 They would like go and they'd be like, oh yeah, here it is. 34:08 And they would put this pin in the continent of Australia because it said Iraq on it. 34:16 You could do the same thing today where you could go to these people and be like, oh, do you support Ethereum? 34:20 Or you could tell them there's this new Ethereum project coming out. It's called Taro. 34:25 Do you support it? And just describe Taro perfectly, exactly, accurately. 34:30 And they would be like, no, it's an Ethereum project. 34:34 And then you could flip it again and you could say, you know, there's this new Bitcoin project, new Bitcoin idea. 34:42 And just describe anything that was being done in Ethereum. And people would say, oh, yeah, that sounds great. 34:49 A long rant. I guess we got sidetracked from the main topic and we're going to watch that debate. 34:55 But before that, I need to play this ad and then we can go straight into commenting mode. 35:01 It's going to be a premiere for you, Paul. So get ready. 35:05 Excited. 35:07 Wasabi Wallet is unfairly private. 35:10 It's the most advanced and most used Bitcoin privacy wallet with half a million downloads across Windows, Mac OS and Linux, 35:18 as well as thousands of fresh new bitcoins getting mixed every month. 35:22 Wasabi makes use of the new generation Wabi Sabi engine to create mega coin joins, 35:28 thus mixing your bitcoins with those of hundreds of other users. 35:32 For amounts lower than 0.01 BTC and remixes, you pay no coordination fee. 35:38 Even if you don't use coin joins, Wasabi Wallet has a native Tor integration and downloads block filters 35:45 to help you keep your network level and public key privacy. 35:49 Download Wasabi Wallet for free today at WasabiWallet.io and experience the future of Bitcoin privacy. 35:58 OK, Paul, let's hope that Jitsi has no issue with live videos. 36:07 Oh, no, it says, please provide a correct video link. 36:11 So I need to figure out another way in which we can watch this at the same time. 36:16 We could, you know, whatever, use a, I don't know, Zoom or something or have Keet also. 36:23 Yeah, yeah, but that means that we have to end this call and switch to another one. 36:27 And it's live and people are waiting for this. 36:30 And for some reason, Jitsi doesn't like. 36:32 I mean, what I can do and what I should have done was to download this 36:36 and just cut that part and upload it somewhere else. 36:41 I can do this. 36:42 So give me my Internet is pretty fast. 36:45 Let me download this and we can switch to Shinobi's article. 36:49 And we can switch to Shinobi's article. 36:51 In the meantime, we just switched the order. 36:55 And I'm going to do everything else in the background. 36:58 So let's go to Shinobi's article. 37:00 He wrote for Bitcoin Magazine this piece, which is called Drivechains Are Stupid, Prove Me Wrong. 37:06 Maybe. 37:07 So are you able to see it now? 37:12 I don't know. 37:13 I just see a giant black square. 37:15 I don't know why. 37:16 Sorry. 37:17 Maybe if it's like streaming in progress performance settings. 37:21 Let me see this. 37:22 Maybe this. 37:23 Adjust for best performance. 37:25 That's what I'll do. 37:26 No. 37:28 I don't think that worked. 37:29 Hey, I don't know. 37:30 But I did. 37:31 I already wrote a huge thing and it's in my tweet highlights. 37:35 I don't know. 37:36 I can't see it. 37:37 Sorry. 37:38 You could read it to me. 37:39 I can read it to you. 37:40 Sorry. 37:41 I just see a black screen. 37:43 But if everyone goes to my Twitter and they can do the highlights, the highlights are pretty good. 37:50 And one of them is this. 37:54 And even though I wrote that, I don't think... 37:56 I mean, I might as well open it so that I don't... 37:58 I kind of... 38:01 I think Mark Twain or whatever said if I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter. 38:06 But whatever. 38:09 Anyway. 38:12 Okay. 38:13 So let me read this for you. 38:14 We're going to try something of an experiment today. 38:18 Drivechains are being proclaimed by some as the savior of Bitcoin, the answer to all of its problems. 38:25 It solves the long-term security budget, allows complete freedom to incorporate new features into Bitcoin, and presents no downsides for existing Bitcoin users. 38:34 Sounds too good to be true? 38:36 It is. 38:38 The first subchapter, which says Drivechains change miner incentives. 38:43 Drivechains introduce a hedge podge. 38:47 Hedge podge? 38:48 Hodge podge. 38:50 Hodge podge. 38:51 I don't know what this is. 38:52 I'm not... 38:53 It's like a giant group of disparate things that are all thrown together. 38:58 So they introduce a hodge podge of new variables into miner incentives. 39:03 And after introducing that instability, advocates push for users simply adopting a degraded security model for all new use cases and functionality by using a sidechain in lieu of changing the base layer. 39:19 This was excessively long and convoluted. 39:23 How is this any different than an outright attack on Bitcoin self-custody? 39:30 So can you address this? 39:32 Yeah, but what do you think of it, Vlad? 39:33 I mean, like, the same people who are anti-DC say, well, eventually everything will be custodial. 39:42 So aren't they the ones attacking it? 39:46 Well, yeah, but that's not really addressing it. 39:49 You're just trying to present the other perspective. 39:52 Okay. 39:53 Well, oh, my gosh, this is so dark. 39:56 Let me add more lights here. 39:58 I can send you the link and you can just read it on your screen. 40:02 It's more efficient. 40:04 Look on Telegram. 40:06 I'll give them a tweet where I replied with it at length. 40:09 So I can go through my... 40:10 I mean, so the heart of the claim is new miner incentives. 40:15 But to me, I think that claim is true as a detail, but false in substance. 40:23 Because I compare it to Riot's curtailment credits where Riot came up with this clever scheme, which I fully support and I think is a smart decision. 40:35 And it's very good for energy producers. 40:39 It's good for miners. 40:40 It's good for energy consumers. 40:41 It's good for taxpayers. 40:42 It's good for everyone. 40:45 Are you familiar with this idea? 40:47 Riot has this idea where when the need for electricity spikes unexpectedly in a certain time, the government of Texas or ERCOT or whatever it is, which is like a nonprofit run by Texas or whatever, overseen by the state of Texas, they pay Riot to stop mining. 41:14 Okay. 41:15 And so because they say to stop using electricity. 41:19 Now, technically, that changes miners incentives, doesn't it? 41:23 Because this is a thing that didn't exist before. 41:26 But now it exists. 41:28 So now this idea is out there. 41:30 And once it's in use, it directly affects miners incentives, right? 41:33 They're being paid not to mine. 41:38 You know, right? 41:40 So it's a change in detail, but it's not really a change. 41:48 Because mining has always undergone dynamic growth and improvement. 41:52 The invention of ASICs. 41:54 The people reusing the heat. 41:57 That was the Bitcoin embassy in Montreal. 42:02 They would instead of paying for heat in the winter, they would just run Bitcoin miners. 42:10 So you have whatever FPGAs, ASICs, you have heat. 42:13 You have when they did the stranded natural gas flaring. 42:17 So this introduces a new way to make money. 42:21 But that's not itself anything new. 42:23 That has always happened and that always will happen. 42:32 Do you think that squarely addresses it or not? 42:35 I mean, what do you think about this whole changing miners incentives thing? 42:40 But do you agree that Drivechains change mining incentives? 42:43 Yeah, they give miners an incentive to care about which portfolio of sidechains, which sidechains to drop or add. 42:50 And the miners are enticed by the fees to support the sidechains. 42:57 So in that sense, it does give them something new to do that they get money for. 43:05 But again, that's the same as the right curtailment credits or the natural gas credits. 43:11 So I don't see it as I personally don't see it as different. 43:16 But maybe this is my maybe it's a mistake for me to talk about it that way. 43:22 Why do you say it's a mistake? 43:26 Well, I don't know. 43:27 Like on one hand, if I say it does affect mining incentives in exactly the same way that they are always affected. 43:34 That just doesn't sound. 43:36 When people say it's going to change mining incentives, what they mean is that the miners will be doing something after Drivechain. 43:43 That is like significantly different than what they were doing before. 43:48 You know what I mean? 43:51 Let's say the miners are someone comes out with the next generation miner, you know. 43:58 Does that change mining incentives? 44:00 Because now you have an incentive to buy that miner and get rid of your old one because difficulty is going up. 44:06 Like, you know what I mean? 44:07 So to me, it does not change mining incentives. 44:10 Because it's like if that was going to change it, then everything would change it. 44:15 And that can't be what people mean. 44:20 merge mining haven't been invented by Satoshi already. 44:23 Already in 10 years plus years of continuous use. 44:27 So does that make any sense or no? 44:30 Partially, but there is this question again. 44:33 Why do you think that Bitcoin needs other blockchains to help it scale? 44:38 Well, that's a different question. 44:40 But I think we may not. 44:43 I think right now, one thing I didn't realize. 44:45 In the past, I just thought this will make, we have two groups of people. 44:49 They're not that happy with each other. 44:51 Small blockers, large blockers. 44:52 I thought, let's try to get them happy. 44:54 Let's try to get them happy. 44:55 We can make them both happy. 44:59 And I didn't even think of it as a competition over what scaling form was best at all. 45:06 I just thought, some people want their thing. 45:08 I'll give it to them. 45:11 Now, though, that I'm older and wiser and have spent more years in the technical community. 45:15 It's obvious to me that this idea is probably the best one. 45:22 The best way of scaling Bitcoin. 45:25 Because it's basically a lightning network. 45:27 But where there's infinite liquidity at all times. 45:32 And you can receive money without being online. 45:35 And with no need for watchtowers. 45:38 There's no griefing of the channels. 45:41 There's no fee that is based on the amount of money. 45:46 There's no sensitivity to L1 fee rates. 45:51 So it's just that today when two lightning network clients talk to each other and they can't even agree on what the L1 fee rate is. 45:57 They uncooperative close immediately. 46:02 The need to sign, not only be online, but to sign with a hot wallet to receive money. 46:10 These are all huge disadvantages of lightning that just go away if you scale with this instead. 46:18 I think it's a no brainer. 46:20 I don't even know what the people are talking about who don't want it. 46:23 Now I'm practically, I was a small blocker and I still am. 46:26 And I think the block size should be 350 kilobytes actually. 46:29 But I'm becoming more of a large blocker now that I see just how completely irrational. 46:34 It's like anything that would make Roger very happy, some of these people have to be against. 46:40 It's funny that you say that. 46:43 The so-called technical elite, the meritocracy is completely corrupt. 46:51 It's funny that you came to this conclusion and people are going to call you literally Roger Veer in the comments. 46:58 But you're going to have a surprise when we watch the debate, which by the way, I cut down exactly that segment. 47:05 It's being rendered right now by my video editing software. 47:09 And then I have to upload it on YouTube so we can watch it. 47:12 I can make this happen in the background. 47:15 I'm super happy about it. 47:18 But you're going to have a nice surprise by the end of this debate that we're going to watch. 47:23 But let's move on to the next point because that's what we said we would do. 47:27 Just analyze Shinobi's input. 47:30 Yeah, but do you really feel like I've addressed the first point or what? 47:34 It does literally in details change mining incentives, but that's misleading because mining incentives literally change every single day. 47:44 Whenever anyone has a cheaper source of power, you as a miner, you are constantly affected by what all the rival miners do. 47:53 And this is really, really, really different from merely running a full node. 47:57 So I'm saying we have to protect the decentralization of Bitcoin, which is the cost of running the L1 full node. 48:06 Trying to protect miners by letting them have small costs, like low fixed costs or low costs, that is a waste of time. 48:13 And that is actually just against proof of work anyway. 48:16 It's just saying that you want it to be easy to find a block. 48:18 Then you're just saying you want to remove the upward difficulty adjustments from Bitcoin. 48:23 You want to remove proof of work from Bitcoin. 48:25 You hate proof of work and you hate Bitcoin, basically. 48:31 You want something that's a complete such a different idea that it might as well be something else. 48:37 Yeah, but at the same time, you're explaining that making ASIC miners more efficient is similar with providing extra incentives for miners, which are different concepts. 48:48 But OK, that's true. 48:49 But isn't it just it's like it's all about profit maximization. 48:53 So it's whether or not they bring the costs down or the revenues up. 48:56 It makes literally no difference, right? 48:58 If you save ten dollars of costs versus you extract ten dollars more of revenue, it's the same thing. 49:06 From an economic point of view, I can agree with you. 49:08 But technically, you're adding extra incentives for miners to take fees from somewhere else. 49:15 Well, it's kind of weird, though, because what if I invented an ASIC that instead of saving ten dollars, somehow induced transaction fees to go up by ten dollars? 49:24 And then to me, it's really not. 49:28 But I don't know. I guess maybe this is a miscommunication. 49:30 We should get someone else to communicate this idea a different way, maybe. 49:34 Because changing mining incentives to me would be like before the miners just sort transactions on L1. 49:42 And now they have like incentive to like I don't even like what do people think that the miners are doing right now? 49:54 Like that's my question to those people. 50:00 Well, they, I don't know, blocks and they take the fees. 50:05 I know, but that's all they do under in Drivechain also, because of BIP300/301. 50:09 They're just including a fee that pays a high transaction fee. They're also I guess, choosing 50:16 which sidechains are activated and not, but they already activate soft forks. Also, every 50:21 single soft fork is activated by the miners. And must be, that's another weird 50:26 misconception that the miners are irrelevant to soft fork activation, but that is simply 50:31 false. 50:32 Activated by users. 50:34 Yeah, it's simply false. 50:35 It's not. 50:37 The issue is a misunderstanding of what it would mean to, but it doesn't, but I think it's a 50:45 moot point, but it doesn't matter because, but I can, we can go into it in detail. And again, 50:49 it's in my highlighted tweets, but it's not a coincidence that every soft fork has 50:54 activated via the miners. It's also the fact that if you break, it's a hard fork. If you 51:02 break a rule, like if you break, if you move the block size up, you're breaking the block 51:09 size limit rule. If you break the heaviest chain rule, that is also a hard fork. 51:18 So it's the whole thing's through and through is sort of incorrect. And this is not to imply 51:25 that the miners are running the show. They are not, they are the security guards and the 51:29 people. It's very important that miners not be running things, but, but it's also just the 51:40 literal truth of what, how soft fork activates, inevitably involves the miners participating. 51:53 Yeah, let's go to the next point from Shinobi's article, which says existing sidechains have no 51:59 adoption. There have been different design proposals for sidechains over the years, but the 52:05 only currently deployed ones are run by federations, Liquid and RSK, both of which have 52:11 failed to gain any meaningful level of adoption since they weren't deployed. And I should also 52:16 show the screen. Okay. Does this mean sidechains are not worth continued development effort, or 52:25 are they worth it? And the failure of federated chains to be adopted is simply the result of 52:31 shortcomings in that specific sidechain design. 52:36 Screwed up my microphone here. And one second. Okay, so the, yeah, of course, I've heard it like 52:46 a million times. The thing is, the federated model is the whole difference between Bitcoin and its 52:52 failed predecessors. So you've heard of like Liberty Reserve and whatever. Have you heard of 52:58 those? Right. And we had those, and they didn't work out because there was a fixed number of 53:08 people that you could take down in order to defeat the network. And that was why those didn't 53:16 work. And that is the difference between Liquid and Bitcoin is also the same thing. I can tell 53:27 that that doesn't make any sense. Did you understand what I said? So like, the federated model is 53:31 terrible. It is just a situation where you have a static number of people who have no, they have the 53:40 ability to take all the coins, but they have no, there's no ability to replace these people. Okay, 53:47 I fixed this now. Sorry about that. 53:49 Okay, so is your point that Bitcoin never had any real sidechains? 53:54 Yes, but it sort of doesn't matter because even though we should expect the 300 to outcompete the 54:02 federated model, it doesn't like the federated model is, RSK and Liquid are like two handwritten 54:13 books and Bith 300 is kind of like a printing press. Because you can't go if you could go to 54:19 Liquid and you could just give it like the Zcash full node software, then you could and then you 54:30 got out of that a new federation that does what Zcash does, then they would be comparable. But 54:38 that's not what happens at all. So it's not even the same thing. You know what I mean? Like Bith 54:42 300 is this decentralized process that lets you do whatever, whichever thing. Do you understand 54:50 what I mean by that? You can't like there's no like EVM Liquid. Yeah, there's no Zcash. There's 54:58 no Zcash Liquid. Well, how can I use Liquid to make Zcash sidechain tomorrow? How can I do that? 55:07 Well, I guess you should experiment with the elements blockchain. 55:11 Yeah, but it's like I just want to just take I want to just copy and paste Zcash open source 55:16 software and create the Zcash sidechain. I mean, after all, Liquid is sidechains or whatever, 55:25 created by the great geniuses at Blockstream, who raised so much money that if they spent a 55:30 million dollars a year, they would have billions of dollars at today's prices. 55:35 We had Andrew Polstro, we had Greg Maxwell, Adam Back, you know, so and they know everything about 55:41 sidechains because they're October 2014 paper. So how can it be? What do I do? What's the technique 55:47 for using Liquid if I want like a Monero ring signature sidechain? The Monero has already been 55:52 built. So what do we do? Or my prediction markets project that I also built, BitcoinHiveMind.com. 56:00 How do I use Liquid to connect that sidechain to Bitcoin? 56:07 Yeah, what people are going to ask you, why do you want to use Liquid for that? 56:11 And why do you want to use shitcoins? They're going to be like, yeah, why don't you? 56:14 There's no Monero, there is no for the Monero sidechain or Zcash sidechain, there is no 56:20 altcoin thing for like, there's no other thing that people could possibly buy. 56:28 But the prediction markets there is because of course, the point is to buy 56:33 like something that you're betting on, like who will win like a sports game or something. 56:39 So there are things you could buy that aren't Bitcoin. Just like in the real world, you could 56:43 buy like, you know, a banana or a car. I wonder if these people do think like, 56:50 if a banana was digital, like do they think like every Steam game is a shitcoin? I wonder where 56:56 the line is with that. We should do like some, if we had like some street epistemology like that 57:00 guy does, could maybe crack that nut open. But no, I want to know what are these people talking about? 57:08 Well, some of them are talking about rewriting everything from scratch. 57:12 And they say, oh, Zcash sucks because it's inefficient. Why would you want to? 57:15 Yeah, we wouldn't want that anyway. Yeah. But what is it though? Are they saying Liquid is 57:20 already doing that thing that we don't want? Or are they saying no one has ever wanted to do that? 57:24 Because then why did Liquid, why was Liquid created in the first place? 57:27 No, they're going to say that Liquid was a bad prototype and the technology is still young and 57:32 there's no need to rush. And if you wait long enough, they're going to figure out a better way 57:37 to do it. Like MimbleWimble, I think that's an important breakthrough. They figured out how to 57:43 do privacy in a scalable way. Well, yeah, I don't think actually MimbleWimble does. 57:48 Maybe it's changed, but the original MimbleWimble had a defect where if anyone was just watching 57:53 and just logging everything, they would know all the history of messages so the transaction 58:05 cut through would not really do anything. Okay, fair. Let's get to the third point 58:11 made by Shinobi. Okay, no, wait, wait, wait. But let's just crack all this. I want to make sure 58:17 that you really feel like I addressed each point. So this first point was this changing 58:21 miner incentives. So do you feel like I addressed it or no? I think you spent way too much time 58:28 trying to deflect and talk about what is the consequence of basically allowing the status 58:37 quo to continue and you're presenting Drivechains as the savior from that custodial situation. 58:44 Well, that's not the miner incentives part. The mining incentives, the miners have an incentive 58:51 to innovate. Would you agree or disagree? Sure, they want to be as efficient as they can. 58:57 If one innovates and the other does not, then what will happen very quickly? 59:04 Well, given the halvings that happen every 200 and 10,000 blocks. 59:09 It's not just a difficulty adjustment. If one miner is getting really clever and they get the 59:14 invent demand curtailment credits and they invent ASICs and they invent immersion cooling 59:19 and the other miners are not doing that, what will happen? 59:25 They're going to drive them away unless there's some ideological mining with people mining for 59:30 the sake of it. Well, that's no different than altruism. So if there's a budget for that, 59:34 then it will take them as far as until they run out of money to burn. 59:40 Miners have an incentive to innovate. They would innovate on, 59:44 and they had not only have they innovated on reducing costs, but they also innovate in 59:48 increasing revenue. That and Satoshi invented merge mining and many of them, 59:53 whatever slush pool or brains as it's called now, they do that. And so according to BitMEX 1:00:01 research, you can look at their article. Lots of people are doing it. And 1:00:05 miners do all kinds of things to generate more revenue. 1:00:12 Sometimes I think the miners don't have as much of a technical knowledge of what's in the long 1:00:19 run best interest of their own industry that they participate in, which is because it's very, 1:00:28 very difficult to have that kind of technical knowledge. And it's, but miners certainly are, 1:00:33 you know, they have invested a lot, you know, a lot of money, invested an enormous amount of money, 1:00:38 and they are very serious people. They want Bitcoin to succeed. And I think they don't always 1:00:44 know. They don't always do like what I personally would do. But, and I think that happened during 1:00:50 the block size war where they, they just decided to try something or whatever under suspicious 1:00:56 circumstances, but, but I, they have always innovated and they, if they stop, they will die. 1:01:04 So. Okay. So what's your point here? That my point is it doesn't Drivechain, just merge mining. And 1:01:12 in fact, 301 means that they don't even do it's it reduces, it removes, it transforms the old change 1:01:20 merge mining invented by Satoshi. 301 transforms that into just including transactions that pay a 1:01:27 lot of fees on L1. As for 300, it does add an incentive for miners to curate the list 1:01:35 of sidechains. Like they're like, they like, they own a movie theater or something. They say, 1:01:38 oh, we're playing these sidechains. But if they do a better job, then they collect more fees. 1:01:44 They collect the more valuable coin. If they do a bad job, they collect less. So 1:01:52 it's no different than I point out that they do lots of other things, such as when they would 1:01:56 use to activate soft forks with BIP9. They would do things and they sponsor people. 1:02:02 Miners will hire people to just show Bitcoin, like to hire whatever, Pierre Rochard. 1:02:07 Another, probably another mistake, but they, the point is they pay 1:02:14 money to help Bitcoin. They sponsor things. A miner sponsored various, I don't remember 1:02:21 exactly which ones they were the top tier sponsor for, but the scaling Bitcoin was 1:02:26 in part sponsored by miners. Miners sponsor conferences, miners do things 1:02:30 to increase the revenue of their operation. So this is no different than that. It undoes 1:02:37 the merge mining change actually, which was invented by Satoshi in 2010. 1:02:43 The second one is about the sidechains that have no adoption. 1:02:48 Liquid and RSK, Liquid especially is not, is not a sidechain because the federated model, 1:02:54 the federated model is you have fixed set of custodians who can steal instantly. You have no, 1:03:00 you have no control in it over the, there's no process. There's no decentralized process that, 1:03:09 that harmonizes the interests of the different groups. So it's the difference between being 1:03:15 like having like a trial by jury, the randomly selected jury and having just one barbaric, 1:03:24 you know, kangaroo court where the judge can just execute anyone he doesn't like. 1:03:30 It's the difference between Liberty Reserve and Bitcoin. It's the difference between success and 1:03:35 failure. The people who admit who don't, the reason this knowledge has spread very slowly 1:03:41 is because of the ongoing failure of the basically Blockstream who, who initially 1:03:47 championed this idea and then they backed off of it and they backed off of it and then they had to 1:03:54 have this, the word sidechain had to like mean something. So it came to mean 1:04:00 an 11 or 15 multisig. The actual Liquid sidechain itself had like an error where 1:04:10 the Blockstream itself could abscond with all the money and then this was then caught and then this 1:04:15 went back and forth over the, whether or not this was a bug or it was disclosed the right way or 1:04:19 how long it had been happening or whether or not it was a big deal. And a lot of people pointed 1:04:23 fingers at each other and say, this is. Okay. At this point, he produced an argument that was 1:04:30 presented to me by Luke Dashjr. on Twitter. Okay, great. He came back to Twitter. He basically told 1:04:36 me that in the case of Liquid, you can at least sue someone because you have some entities that 1:04:41 are responsible for this. And basically what this implies is that the security model that he wants 1:04:48 is that the state is the last judge, the last resort. Right. Of course, it's exactly upside 1:04:54 down of what normally would be considered the cypherpunk thing, which is that, okay, if we're, 1:04:59 if all was, if it's going to be lawsuit based, then why have a blockchain at all? So again, 1:05:04 these people have flipped and become the large blockers. Unfortunately, I don't even know if 1:05:07 they realize that this is what they've done. You don't want it to be like that at all. And in fact, 1:05:13 no one can sue Liquid because even though the security model expressly relies 1:05:20 on them being geographically distributed and having no common interests, like no, 1:05:26 no ability to collude. And it relies on their reputation. 1:05:32 No one can put in the list who the 15 people are. They link to the Liquid Federation members, 1:05:38 which has literally not a list that has nothing to do with, nothing to do with who the 15 key 1:05:43 holders are. So no one knows who these people are, let alone how the key ceremony was performed, 1:05:49 or if it was performed the right way. Liquid, the software wasn't even open source until like last 1:05:53 month, you know, which is absurd that it would go until 2023. The transaction fees do not go to L1 1:06:00 miners. They go directly to a wallet that is controlled by the Blockstream Corporation. 1:06:06 So this is like, you know, it's like the, it's like the practically turning into the bad guys 1:06:12 from the whatever, the robot, Mr. Robot Show, or something. It's like this weird corporation 1:06:17 wants it all to go through them. Then the miners will not be affected. But it's because they just 1:06:24 control everything. If Liquid had a deal, Liquid would become, it would have the same effect on, 1:06:30 it would, Liquid would also affect mining incentives. If the Liquid, 1:06:37 if the Liquid, you know, whoever is responsible for that wallet at Blockstream, if Liquid is 1:06:44 completely closed source centralized, collects the fees, and then just starts donating those 1:06:49 fees randomly to Bitfury and to Foundry, then it would, then Liquid would also affect mining 1:06:57 incentives. I think it was in 2018 or 2019 on the stage of Baltic Honey Badger that Peter Todd 1:07:05 basically burned Samson Mao and told him that Liquid was an attack on Bitcoin. And if it becomes 1:07:11 too successful, it's going to take away fees and activity from Bitcoin. Well, yeah, I mean, 1:07:17 so in that sense, people are agreeing that miners, this is the idea that is now called the security 1:07:24 budget, that we want miners to be paid a lot of money so that the miners are very, very healthy. 1:07:30 And that we don't want the miners to be easily, if miners are very, very poor, and they don't 1:07:34 have a lot of money coming in, they will be susceptible to bribes, just shutting down 1:07:40 threats. Whereas if instead they're getting paid hundreds of billions of dollars, hundreds of 1:07:45 billions of dollars a year, then they're going to be loyal to the Bitcoin network and the Bitcoin 1:07:50 user, they're not going to be loyal to some idiot, or, you know, someone who will try to bribe 1:07:57 them or threaten them. I have a fellow Romanian friend who basically told me that the best 1:08:04 solution is to wait for more block confirmations if miners start dropping. And that's his vision 1:08:11 of Bitcoin, basically, that we're going to have. Because it doesn't make any sense. When people 1:08:16 say that, they mean if there's more like orphaned blocks or there's short reorgs or something. 1:08:23 But the attacker will attack to just like, they can either just suppress the entire network 1:08:29 for a period of time, in which case it doesn't matter how many, there is no confirmations, 1:08:35 or they couldn't do a huge reorg, in which case you also, you don't even know until after it 1:08:39 has happened. So what do those people think? Those people don't know what the attack, 1:08:44 what the attack is. I think anyone who says that misunderstands the security budget problem. 1:08:50 Okay, let me get back to this. Well, basically, you understand, like they say, wait for more 1:08:55 confirmations, like that would apply in a world where there's often reorgs. Yes. Yeah. But the, 1:09:04 but the security budget issue just says if it only costs 10 cents a year, if the only if miners only 1:09:10 making 10 cents a year, then there kind of is no proof of work. So it's like they, they pay 11 1:09:17 cents a year, and you you've got the whole year. So what are they going to do? Wait for a year's 1:09:20 worth of confirmations? Well, some people are into that. And the idea was first promoted by Nick 1:09:28 Sabo, who said that if the security budget is going to suffer, and Satoshi's bet is not going 1:09:34 to play out the way that he taught, we're going to have to wait for more confirmations. Because 1:09:39 the other two extremes are yours, which is to create sidechains that are pegged to the main 1:09:46 chain and have merge mining. The other extreme is Peter Todd's, which is to add tail emission, 1:09:51 that's increase the block size. So I think that's what it really is, though. And it's very 1:09:55 disappointing to hear Nick Sabo say something like that, because to me, it's very, very clear 1:10:03 that this is what people do in their head. They think, okay, I don't want inflation. And I don't 1:10:09 want a block size increase. And you know, what's even more disappointing is I think people think 1:10:14 they don't even actually know why. They just know this idea won't make me popular in Bitcoin. Block 1:10:22 size increase, we don't want that. And in violating 21 million coin limit, maybe people have some idea 1:10:28 of what that's for. But I think most people just realize, okay, I'll be humiliated if I say that. 1:10:34 So they have to believe that it doesn't matter if the transactions are only 10 cents a transaction, 1:10:40 and there's only 2000 transactions a block. And then there's only 1000 blocks, 1000 blocks a week. 1:10:48 So multiply that out, it's still going to be a significant chunk of money. But that's how much 1:10:53 it's to do a 1000 block reorg. So that's not going to work if there's like, huge, gigantic 1:11:02 settlement, if anyone has out there is trying to pay. I mean, just just add it up, look up how much 1:11:09 money is actually paid in a given day. It's hard, it's hard to tell. But I one time I looked it up, 1:11:15 like 10 years ago, I looked at the forex volume was like $5 trillion of value a day, which is just 1:11:20 forex trading alone. So maybe that would all maybe not that maybe that wouldn't happen. That wouldn't 1:11:27 all net down to one. But that just gives you an idea of and that was a long time ago. 1:11:36 But there's also the Michael Saylor approach to this situation is going up forever, Laura. 1:11:42 So we're going to double in price before every having so there's not going to be any decrease 1:11:48 in security ever. Because Bitcoin is going to eat up every currency in the world, we're going to 1:11:54 take over gold, we're going to take over treasuries, we're gonna end up living in a world where 1:11:59 everything is denominated and Bitcoin, you're gonna have 21 million and being divided by infinity. 1:12:06 Yeah, I know. The other way around infinity divided by 21 million. 1:12:12 Right. I mean, I think every dignified person has to ask themselves if they're being like, 1:12:17 completely brainwashed by again, but long before anyone had ever heard of Michael Saylor, 1:12:23 and I think it was in 2019, February, I wrote an article where the first security budget article, 1:12:31 I think I called security budget in the long run. And in it, I assume that Bitcoin, not only double 1:12:38 but hits the absolute highest price that can possibly hit and then rises at the highest rate, 1:12:43 which is that it replaces all the broad money in the entire world. And the GDP is increasing, 1:12:49 it has been increasing at like a certain percentage, like every year, ever since the data, 1:12:54 for all the years that I could find the data. On average, it's a very trend. And then the ratio of 1:12:59 broad money to GDP has also moved on a trend. Both of the trends are favorable towards money, 1:13:05 people hold a higher percentage of their wealth in money, and world GDP goes up. So you can add 1:13:12 those kind of together and get what is the ceiling of Bitcoin. But even still, it doesn't 1:13:20 matter. I literally have done these numbers, and it just, in the long run, it doesn't matter. 1:13:29 Okay, so what's the conclusion that Bitcoin can basically hit that trillion dollar price? 1:13:36 Well, one thing that people should be able to tell is that eventually, it will have to zero. 1:13:43 But even if it didn't, it's 50%, 25%, 12.5%, 6. So you're going down by 94% 1:13:52 each time you do whatever it is, like a 16 year period. So it goes down, 1:13:58 even though it takes 100 something years to go down all the way, it's going down by 1:14:03 almost all of what it was every 16-20 years. So every 20 years, it's basically eliminated again. 1:14:14 And so it can only go as high as, you know, 15-20 million. It depends on other things, but... 1:14:26 Is that your bullish prediction? It can only go to 15-20 million per coin? 1:14:31 Yeah, but there's another issue with that, which is that I've never actually written this down. 1:14:35 But I think I should, because it should become a Bitcoin meme, which is, in my head, I call it 1:14:41 the final rotation into Bitcoin. I don't know why I call it that, but I don't know if it makes any 1:14:46 sense. But these are the people who, there's no possibility, we're going to get adoption 1:14:52 of about like half of the world, best case scenario, will adopt. 1:14:57 Half of the world, best case scenario, will adopt. And then we need like the second half of the people to, but they're going to have to adopt, even though there's no NGU, because the number will have already hit its maximum. 1:15:07 There was no number go up. So they have to adopt based on it being improving Bitcoin, improving their lives. So they have to adopt for some kind of feature, like some kind of... 1:15:19 They have to adopt for something like cheap transactions, or private transactions, or remittances, or something. 1:15:32 I don't know if I'm articulating this very well, but it's... You see what I mean? Because the early adopters, they get all the number go up. They're speculators, or we are speculators. 1:15:42 But regular people are going to say, I missed the opportunity to speculate. So now the... I have to be a real user, like how we didn't, maybe we didn't make money in the dot com. 1:15:56 We didn't own shares of Google. But we adopted the internet, because the internet really is better than calling the restaurant and trying to place an order over the phone and telling them your phone number and then telling them where their address is. 1:16:10 And then the pizza guy has to know every address in the town, which was how it used to be. 1:16:20 But the internet is better. So they have to be real users. They have to be non... They have to be anti-speculation adopters. 1:16:29 And if we don't have that, if there's two coins where one of them could get that, get to this last group, and another coin could not, then the coin that cannot, it will go to zero. 1:16:44 I hope that's obvious. 1:16:46 So basically, you're saying that speculation can only go so far. 1:16:50 Right, it only takes you to the... It takes you to the many steps, but it cannot take you to the last step. The last step must be that it is actually better for everyone. 1:17:00 That the end user who's not, who's not saving in it at all. So I don't, you know, saving is important and whatever, but the... It is doomed if... 1:17:09 The coin will go to not only do... Is it a good thing if there's more uses of Bitcoin, but without the willingness of people to voluntarily switch because it improves their lives, they will go to zero. 1:17:26 And a lot of people think, well, those people will come, they'll be so desperate, they'll need to eat, and they will be forced to adopt Bitcoin. 1:17:34 And it's like, no, because they're using some... That's the whole point of what's why I say they use the word switch. They are using something else, and they won't switch unless they find it better. 1:17:50 Yeah, and that's going to come with Taproot assets and RGB whenever they get adopted. 1:17:55 Yeah, whenever, one day, we'll have that. We'll get that right around the corner. 1:18:00 So a lot of people don't like that type of thing. They say there should be, we should not, we should not care at all about any use case. We should just be... 1:18:12 It should just be gold, except that it doesn't rot. 1:18:15 Which is good, but again, it's not good enough. The space will get competitive. It hasn't been... The competitors have been very bad. But that's only because it's early. 1:18:26 So we are early, and as soon as it'll be, this will be a normalized thing to have. 1:18:34 And everyone, anyone who makes one will, like in 2025, will have a plan to dethrone because you can make a huge amount of money if you succeed. 1:18:45 If you, if you succeed and you create a business, and you make a lot of money, you're going to make a lot of money. 1:18:53 Like in 2025, we'll have a plan to dethrone because you can make a huge amount of money if you succeed. 1:19:00 If you, if you succeed and you create something that gets hyper-Bitcoinization or hyper-whatever, hyper-Vladcoinization, then of course, it's an unbelievable amount of money. 1:19:17 The Immaculate Conception thing that people bring up is a problem, but it is not as big a problem as what we have in Bitcoin now, which is hatred of the user. 1:19:27 That is a much bigger problem than Immaculate Conception. 1:19:33 Well, that's super relative because when you have so many voices and so many people using the network at the same time, 1:19:39 it's normal for some to want to basically push the use towards a certain situation that favors them. 1:19:47 And an example is when people were using ordinal inscriptions back in February and March, were being blamed by El Salvadorians for paying high on-chain fees for their remittances. 1:20:00 So it goes like this, you know, Bitcoin is for anyone, but not necessarily for everyone because you're going to have to pay the fee at one point. 1:20:12 Well, I mean, it's a basic Metcalfe's law network effects. 1:20:16 Even if it's not, if you don't think it's n squared, it's definitely n times log n, where each user makes the network more popular, more recognized, more... 1:20:33 People don't like to have more than one form of money. 1:20:35 They find it annoying, just like they don't like to speak more than one language. 1:20:38 So some people can, but most people don't. 1:20:40 So it's just not... 1:20:42 When you go to Japan, you need yen and you need to speak Japanese. 1:20:47 So if it's small, it will be tough. 1:20:54 It will be tough, especially when all this stuff becomes commonly known. 1:20:59 Everyone knows all this stuff about all the different L2s. 1:21:02 They know all about proof of work. 1:21:05 People know about how to bootstrap currencies. 1:21:08 And yeah, I think there's kind of a time limit on a lot of this anyway, where I think very soon there will be... 1:21:16 I mean, everything will do like the WeChat Pay model in the back, whatever, Chinese smart cities. 1:21:23 That stuff is kind of already happening. 1:21:25 So, but yeah, the Ordinal's thing is also... 1:21:29 It reveals that if you don't care about the user, then that, okay, you can get away with that for a little while. 1:21:34 But then ultimately you lose control of the block space. 1:21:38 So maybe you control some things, but you lose control of other things. 1:21:48 So you say, we don't care about security budget. 1:21:49 But then it's like, okay, but now the miners are going to be loyal to the Ordinal's people. 1:21:59 They don't even care about people using Bitcoin as money. 1:22:04 They don't even care about how can we get more Ordinal's. 1:22:09 No, I think that was a way to mess with mining incentives. 1:22:14 And I think I've heard this conversation before with Counterparty, with people trading rare Pepe's. 1:22:19 And there was this talk that if one rare Pepe card is more valuable than the block reward, 1:22:27 it can mess up mining incentives. 1:22:31 Yeah, but I think this is also a mistake. 1:22:34 Because the same thing can just happen if anyone pays it. 1:22:37 They're eccentric and they pay a huge transaction fee. 1:22:44 But yeah, this is also true. 1:22:46 I mean, I remember Peter Weil was fond of this argument that what will happen if the block 1:22:52 secures stuff that is much, there's like a whole stock market on an L2 of BTC. 1:23:01 Huge amounts of money is traded. 1:23:03 And so then they will divide, want to divide the loyalty of the miners. 1:23:07 But that's partially why I invented Blind Merged Mining so that the L2 could reorg independently 1:23:14 of the L1. 1:23:16 Of course, if you reorg the L1, you'll always, you get a guaranteed reorg of L2. 1:23:20 But you could, in my scheme, you can, it's independent at least. 1:23:24 So there's no additional reason to reorg L1. 1:23:30 I think we got sidetracked too much. 1:23:32 Let's get back to Shinobi's article. 1:23:34 We have two more points to discuss. 1:23:36 And then fortunately, I was able to upload everything on YouTube. 1:23:41 We can watch that debate without an issue. 1:23:45 But let's return to Shinobi. 1:23:48 He says in his third point that Drivechains exacerbate the risks of MEV. 1:23:53 And do you want to go on and explain what MEV is? 1:23:57 Yeah, I do. 1:23:58 But I kind of feel like I should first ask you to explain what it is. 1:24:01 Because I know exactly what it is. 1:24:03 And I wrote it in my tweet article. 1:24:06 And I have a great way of explaining it. 1:24:08 But I'm wondering, like, to what extent does it, is it just throwing 1:24:15 like negative word connotation at the idea? 1:24:19 Like, it's kind of tiresome. 1:24:22 Do you know what MEV is? 1:24:25 No, I want you to explain it. 1:24:27 MEV is a miner side hustle. 1:24:31 So if anything that miners get money for, that's not ordering transactions and ordering blocks. 1:24:40 So if they get paid, if I pay them to do a little dance, then that's MEV. 1:24:47 And if they can extract money by doing something other than order transactions, 1:24:52 just in a boring way. 1:24:54 If I pay them to, like, there's a buy and a sell order. 1:25:01 And they decide, oh, I can make money by changing the order of these transactions 1:25:05 and putting myself in the middle. 1:25:07 Extracting a cut from those users, or usually one of the users. 1:25:12 They are pulling a transaction fee out in a way other than the normal way, 1:25:20 which is just the normal fees. 1:25:22 Normal L1 fees. 1:25:24 Would you say that paying a miner to not include a certain transaction in a block is MEV? 1:25:31 I guess I would, yes. 1:25:33 If, yeah, I think I would. 1:25:37 What other examples can you think of? 1:25:39 Practically, what is MEV? 1:25:41 How would you describe it? 1:25:42 Like brains, the flush pool, new name, they sell apparel on their site. 1:25:53 That is MEV. 1:25:55 They sell t-shirts. 1:25:57 No, that's exaggerated. 1:26:01 Well, what do you think it is, then? 1:26:02 Why don't you define it? 1:26:05 Well, if I were to define it, I would say that... 1:26:07 Okay, sorry. 1:26:09 If you simplify the activity of miners and you say that they're only supposed to get 1:26:13 the block reward and the fee that corresponds to each block. 1:26:18 And that's everything that they do. 1:26:19 And they're not supposed to get money from anywhere else. 1:26:22 So, basically, anything that comes along and messes up with their incentives is MEV. 1:26:28 And it's an abbreviation, right? 1:26:30 It stands for mining electric vehicles. 1:26:36 Well, believe it or not, it actually went through different... 1:26:40 It was called... 1:26:42 I think, actually, it's called maximal extractable value. 1:26:46 But then in the context of proof of work, it is renamed to miner extractable value. 1:26:52 I don't know which... 1:26:54 So, it's funny you mentioned that because even the acronym has switched around. 1:26:57 You should do your own research. 1:27:00 But the thing is, miners, in order to collect transaction fees, 1:27:06 they must have a node and a mempool. 1:27:08 Someone has to have a node and a mempool. 1:27:11 Check every transaction to make sure that it's valid. 1:27:14 Because they only collect money for valid transactions. 1:27:17 And they cannot collect double spends. 1:27:19 They cannot double dip. 1:27:20 If they double dip and they mine a block, it will be an invalid block and they'll get nothing. 1:27:25 Right? 1:27:27 Okay. 1:27:29 So, it's not just like, oh, they just collect a block. 1:27:31 They mine a block and collect a fee. 1:27:32 They must participate in choosing the transactions that will be included in the next block. 1:27:40 Because that's how they maximize their fee revenue. 1:27:43 So, it's really just a matter of taste as to what algorithm they run to maximize their fee revenue. 1:27:50 But I suppose you could say, if it's just only sorting them based on their fee per byte, 1:27:57 L1 fee per byte and nothing else, then it's not MEV. 1:28:02 It's just normal transaction fee revenue. 1:28:05 But if they do anything else, like if they try to double spend Satoshi Dice, 1:28:08 or if they try to double spend a rare Pepe that's worth a ton. 1:28:13 If they do anything else, anything else that earns them more money, 1:28:18 including selling t-shirts on their website, then that is MEV. 1:28:23 And including the riot curtailment credits. 1:28:27 I guess that's too broad, but an example of MEV. 1:28:30 It is too broad, but that's what it is. 1:28:32 That's why I just named it. 1:28:34 Is when Woody basically paid, what's the name of the mining pool? 1:28:39 The out of band $4,000 to get the giant inscription. 1:28:42 For that four megabyte block, yes. 1:28:44 That's MEV, because it goes beyond what's happening on the Bitcoin network. 1:28:48 And there's also MEV that's going to be added to mempool.space. 1:28:53 They want to have this service where you can make a lightning transaction to pay the miner 1:28:59 to basically pick up your... 1:29:03 Yeah, exactly. 1:29:04 This is a very old idea that even in Jihan Wu's day that was done, 1:29:08 where if you were stuck, this was before good fee bumping. 1:29:12 And almost even before child pays for parent. 1:29:15 It used to be the case that if you broadcast a transaction, 1:29:19 you pay too small a fee, you were screwed. 1:29:22 Because all of your inputs were frozen, basically. 1:29:26 And if you tried to broadcast a new version that had a higher fee, 1:29:33 it would count as a double spend and you would get kicked off the network. 1:29:36 So you used to be able to go to Bitmain or somewhere and pay, I think it was Bitmain, 1:29:43 or I don't know. 1:29:46 I think it was Bitmain. 1:29:47 You could pay with a credit card to bump the fee. 1:29:52 Okay, so that was weird. 1:29:53 I think we defined what MEV is. 1:29:56 We explained what can happen. 1:29:57 Yeah, but we didn't really define it. 1:30:00 Do you agree with... 1:30:01 So let me ask you this. 1:30:02 Is the credit card thing of the old days of yore, 1:30:06 is that MEV? 1:30:06 And is brains selling t-shirts? 1:30:09 Is that MEV? 1:30:11 You tell me. 1:30:14 I don't think so. 1:30:16 No. 1:30:17 Anyone can sell t-shirts. 1:30:18 The shirt thing? 1:30:19 Anyone can sell t-shirts. 1:30:20 Not an integral part of their business. 1:30:22 Yeah, but people are only buying them because it's the brand of the mining pool. 1:30:29 Anyone could sell t-shirts, 1:30:30 but like a Bruce Springsteen t-shirt, 1:30:31 like a New York Yankees t-shirt is going to sell 1:30:34 because people want to be associated with the brand. 1:30:38 I think that's a good example. 1:30:39 It's like saying that if you buy too many Bruce Springsteen t-shirts, 1:30:43 he's not going to do any concerts. 1:30:45 Yeah, he'll only care about t-shirts. 1:30:46 He won't care about putting out a new album. 1:30:49 Yeah. 1:30:50 Right. 1:30:51 But do you see how absurd that is though? 1:30:53 Right? 1:30:57 It's the same project, really. 1:30:59 But this is about Bitcoin miners, right? 1:31:01 Celebrity mining. 1:31:01 What is the worst that can happen? 1:31:03 Interesting though, like mining pools do rely on, 1:31:07 their reputation is part of how we keep them vulnerable. 1:31:12 Because we say a mining pool is basically, 1:31:14 people say, listen, I have too much variance by myself. 1:31:18 If you only have one 10,000th network hash rate, 1:31:24 then it'll be months before you find your first solo mining. 1:31:29 So you need the pool to smooth your income. 1:31:35 You tell the pool, listen, you can have a tiny cut, 1:31:37 you pay a charge of fee as long as you're doing the right thing. 1:31:40 But if I catch you doing the wrong thing, 1:31:42 I will switch to a different pool. 1:31:43 So the brand, the fact that the brand lasts a long time, 1:31:47 that's key to the economics of the pool. 1:31:50 And did you know that branding, this is a carnivore angle. 1:31:53 The brand was invented as the cattle brand 1:31:55 and there's laws saying in America and probably everywhere, 1:32:00 but there's laws about like, if they register the brand, 1:32:03 the trademark or whatever, 1:32:04 and they say, you cannot use the other ranchers brand. 1:32:07 The brand, the phrase brand, excuse me, the word, 1:32:12 the marketing brand, it goes back to cattle branding. 1:32:16 So fun fact for you, if you didn't know that. 1:32:21 All right. 1:32:23 So what is the worst that can happen with MEV? 1:32:25 What is everyone afraid of? 1:32:28 Well, I don't think anyone's really thinking about it, 1:32:30 but fortunately for all of you, I did think about it myself. 1:32:32 Long ago in 2016, if you go, I had this giant talk 1:32:37 on what I called sidechain privatization. 1:32:42 And I wrote an essay about it in September, 1:32:44 I think 2015, or maybe right after. 1:32:47 So if you look these up, you'll see, 1:32:49 I had already carefully considered all this 1:32:50 about the different networks like interfering with each other 1:32:53 and one costing the other fees or blocks 1:32:56 or paying someone to omit a transaction 1:32:58 or paying someone to omit a block. 1:32:59 So I had thought about it all back in 2016 already. 1:33:03 So you should watch my old presentation 1:33:04 if you care about such things. 1:33:06 And then you can get it probably the right way. 1:33:11 What I think is happening now is just like people just, 1:33:14 they want, they need to find a reason, 1:33:16 they were mistakenly against this idea. 1:33:20 They need to find somehow a reason, 1:33:22 how can we justify being against this idea? 1:33:24 It can't be the case. 1:33:26 It just can't be the case 1:33:27 that this was the solution the whole time, 1:33:29 counting to 13,000 with an unused op-nop. 1:33:34 And so they are fine. 1:33:35 Okay, MEV, here it is. 1:33:38 So like that guy, Alex B, multiple times, 1:33:41 he will just delete, he'll do a space 1:33:43 and then I joined the space and talk to him 1:33:44 and he just deletes the space afterwards 1:33:46 and he deletes all mention of it. 1:33:47 So he's only, he's deleted many of the things, 1:33:51 some of which I still have. 1:33:53 And this is not about Alex Berg or someone else. 1:33:55 This is about this scenario. 1:33:58 What can happen if we have large-scale MEV in Bitcoin? 1:34:02 No, I think nothing bad. 1:34:03 It's no different than what, 1:34:05 if I, there's nothing the smart contract 1:34:07 can bribe a miner to do 1:34:10 that human beings couldn't bribe a miner to do. 1:34:13 So there's nothing bad that can happen. 1:34:16 I guess you can have this guy from Nigeria or something, 1:34:19 any developing nation, 1:34:22 and he's not in any position to bribe the miners 1:34:26 and he's going to have to wait a lot longer 1:34:28 for his transaction to go through, 1:34:30 even though he's paying the fair fee, 1:34:32 according to the estimation. 1:34:33 But this is a question of the congestion of the blockchain, 1:34:37 which could happen for any reason. 1:34:38 It doesn't have to be MEV. 1:34:39 It doesn't have to be sidechains. 1:34:41 It could be anything. 1:34:44 That's just a congestion point. 1:34:47 The MEV thing is just people who don't understand MEV. 1:34:50 They know that Ethereum talks about it. 1:34:52 They know there's a possibility 1:34:54 of having Ethereum sidechain. 1:34:55 So they just kind of, 1:34:56 they think they put two and two together. 1:34:57 The whole thing is a complete misunderstanding 1:34:59 of how it works on Ethereum anyway, 1:35:02 where in Ethereum, 1:35:05 there's different groups that vertically integrate 1:35:08 to do better MEV. 1:35:10 But in the Drivechain world, 1:35:12 those groups would integrate anyway on the L2 side. 1:35:16 And then the L1 miners would, again, 1:35:18 they would just include whatever pays the highest fee. 1:35:21 So there's no incentive for that group 1:35:24 to vertically integrate. 1:35:26 And it wouldn't matter in the slightest if they did. 1:35:28 It wouldn't matter in the slightest if they did. 1:35:30 Any more than any other benefit that they could obtain. 1:35:33 Like Riot has vertically integrated 1:35:36 with the government of Texas, 1:35:38 with these curtailment credits, 1:35:40 but none of it matters. 1:35:43 Because the miners have a job 1:35:46 to order blocks and not censor transactions. 1:35:51 And the ordering of the blocks is something 1:35:53 where if they stab each other in the back, 1:35:55 they will be stabbing each other in the back forever. 1:35:57 It's like a bunch of people trying to get on, 1:35:59 they're in line, 1:35:59 they're trying to get on the bus or a ferry. 1:36:02 If one of them cuts in line, 1:36:03 if they reorg each other out of the line, 1:36:05 then they'll be reorged. 1:36:07 And so everyone will be in the line, 1:36:08 will just be fighting. 1:36:10 And by the time they'll get on the ferry, 1:36:13 two ferries could have come and gone. 1:36:15 So if they don't order blocks, 1:36:18 then Bitcoin is dead. 1:36:19 But I think that's very safe 1:36:21 that they will order the blocks. 1:36:23 And then the transaction censorship 1:36:24 also has a naturally self-fulfilling, 1:36:28 like it has a healing, 1:36:31 a self-healing attribute 1:36:32 where every censored transaction will just pile up. 1:36:36 And there'll be this huge pile of gold 1:36:39 for anyone who wants to mine a block 1:36:41 that mines the censored transaction. 1:36:44 So it would just increase the ROI 1:36:46 to using a pool that doesn't censor. 1:36:49 In a way, Luxor was the pool. 1:36:52 But since Luxor embraced ordinals, 1:36:54 Luxor was the real mining pool 1:36:57 because the ordinal transactions were all censored. 1:37:03 And similarly, when people embrace merge mining, 1:37:05 merge mine sidechains, 1:37:07 they will be defeating the transaction censorship 1:37:10 imposed by whatever, 1:37:13 the slowness of the Bitcoin development community 1:37:16 to emphasize sidechains. 1:37:19 Right now, the Bitcoin, the whatever, 1:37:22 the BIP process is the biggest transaction censor. 1:37:26 It's the censoring of the merge mine transactions. 1:37:30 And when they finally break through that, 1:37:33 it will be Satoshi's design succeeding 1:37:35 in defeating the censors. 1:37:39 But there's nothing about MEV. 1:37:40 It just means they're going to collect, 1:37:41 they're collecting fees. 1:37:43 They're not censoring. 1:37:44 So instead, all of it is working the way it should work. 1:37:48 Yeah, but it's messing with the basics 1:37:54 that are being described in the white paper, right? 1:37:56 No, it's completely fulfilling them. 1:38:01 How does it mess with the basics? 1:38:03 Well, the role of a miner is, 1:38:07 to put it simply, 1:38:08 to look at the mempool 1:38:10 and pick the transactions that pay the right fee 1:38:14 that makes them include... 1:38:16 But they have to be valid transactions. 1:38:19 Right. 1:38:19 So how is this any different than that? 1:38:23 Well, you're gonna... 1:38:24 In the Drivechain world, it's not. 1:38:25 In the Ethereum world, it is. 1:38:27 But in the Drivechain world, it's not. 1:38:28 They are just picking the transactions 1:38:30 that pay the highest fee on L1. 1:38:32 That's all they're doing. 1:38:35 Okay, let's move on to the next point. 1:38:36 It's exactly the same 1:38:41 as the job they already do now. 1:38:43 And this is, again, 1:38:44 setting aside the issue of whether or not... 1:38:46 It's like, is MEV something 1:38:48 that's only between the terrible smart contract design 1:38:52 and the terrible user who's paying? 1:38:53 The user is the victim. 1:38:58 But maybe to stop using that. 1:39:02 But even if there wasn't, 1:39:03 even if everything was different, it would not... 1:39:06 You know, the MEV, 1:39:09 there's nothing that a smart contract 1:39:11 could pay the miners to do 1:39:14 that a human couldn't, in principle, also pay them. 1:39:17 So the question is like, 1:39:18 will there be some kind of sidechain 1:39:19 that automatically triggers this undesirable behavior? 1:39:24 Somehow. 1:39:26 But I already dealt with this question in 2016. 1:39:28 A long time ago, I gave a big presentation about it. 1:39:31 The sidechain privatization question. 1:39:37 And I already told you before 1:39:38 about how Liquid could just collect the money 1:39:40 and then they could only give the money to 1:39:45 someone who... 1:39:47 Like, they could say, 1:39:48 we'll only give the money to Bitfury 1:39:53 or to a miner who's aligned with us. 1:39:57 And then it would be a literally a requirement in order to mine that you had to have some deal with Liquid, like a signed contract or something. But all this is just a bunch of nonsense, is my real opinion. 1:40:08 Why are you bringing it up then? 1:40:11 You brought it up and then you said it's a bunch of nonsense. 1:40:14 You brought it up and then you said it's a bunch of nonsense. 1:40:17 No, the whole MEV thing is just saying it's bad if miners earn more money. 1:40:24 Who is... 1:40:24 It's not about what, it's about how. 1:40:27 Yeah, okay. It is about how. But what exactly do you think would happen? 1:40:34 Well, you're the expert here. 1:40:36 I know I am. I have a big... I have a huge... In 2016, I put videos out. June or May 2016. 1:40:44 I put out videos explaining it in detail. 1:40:48 It's a five-part thing, sidechain privatization. 1:40:53 And then I put another one, there's another series that's five hours long or something called sidechain risks. 1:40:58 Both from 2016, long before Alex B had ever been born or had even heard about Bitcoin. 1:41:06 You know, that's why you are your own worst enemy, because instead of talking about ideas, you have to always smear some people. 1:41:14 I don't think so. I just think these... No, I think I always talk about the idea. 1:41:20 I always say that a person at the end is a sort of a joke. It's a tie-off. 1:41:26 Yeah, but that's what they're going to remember. 1:41:28 Yeah, but I mean, I don't understand, like... 1:41:31 Like, I don't know, if you've been taking these people seriously, how much hope for you is there, really? 1:41:38 Well, people don't have time. Honestly, this is going to be a three-hour podcast. 1:41:42 People don't have time to listen to this, and they don't have time afterwards to look up all the concepts that are being discussed. 1:41:49 So they're going to look up to someone like Jimmy Song, who says, let's work Bitcoin preemptively right now and create something that cannot ever happen again. 1:41:59 And create something that cannot ever have sidechains or whatever, because we want Bitcoin to only be the way that we know it right now. 1:42:06 We don't want it to change, right? That's what we should... 1:42:09 I know, but if I build this case on something other than the audience's knowledge, then what am I building it on, really? 1:42:15 Well, that's up to you. 1:42:17 But what I'm saying is that you're sending out the wrong message by having these small cracks when you're being petty, maybe, and you're being, 1:42:26 oh, that guy, I should, I mean, I'm not the right person to say this, because I also take shots at the samurai people and I make fun of the cold car people. 1:42:36 But that's entirely different. 1:42:38 I'm not trying to push a fork, you know, I'm just a podcaster. 1:42:41 But my point is that you're bringing up something that can potentially save Bitcoin's mining revenue and secure the budget for miners for a long time. 1:42:54 And make us not increase the block size and most importantly, not change the 21 million cap. 1:43:01 But I feel like the way that you present the message is turning people away and the fact that you specifically had to go for the laser eyed people and make fun of them and stuff like that. 1:43:14 I mean, OK, of course, you understand Bitcoin better than someone who is following Pure Rochard or whatever and takes advice from Dan Held. 1:43:23 But. You have to really educate them, you don't have to make fun of them, that's the point you have to. 1:43:31 I get that you have been trying to do this since 2015 and it must be hard and you don't most likely you don't get attention unless you trigger people, because that's how Twitter works. 1:43:44 But I guess also Twitter is a bad place to debate stuff like this. 1:43:48 Maybe. 1:43:48 Yes, it is. 1:43:50 And of course, the Twitter attention is not it's probably not helping me. 1:43:55 So I don't really want that. 1:43:58 But, you know, I have I mean, what I have is I have the LayerTwo Labs dot com slash friends list, which is like most of the best people in Bitcoin. 1:44:07 So that's like kind of more what I care about. 1:44:11 I also I don't think that it really is turning people off. 1:44:14 I actually think there's only like two or three like bot farm type people, because I don't think any of these people are real. 1:44:21 The I don't think and I don't even think the controversy is that real. 1:44:25 But I think the unpopular opinions panel, they found like a couple of people who where it is real. 1:44:32 So I look forward to actually watching that if we ever get to that. 1:44:37 OK, Paul, we have one last point from Genovi. 1:44:40 Yes, we need to discuss this. 1:44:44 I mean, he's the technical editor of Bitcoin magazine right now, so we need to take this seriously. 1:44:50 I'm being ironic because I used to work for them and they suck. 1:44:52 But anyway, the fourth point is that no swap markets are not an answer. 1:44:59 And he says Pulsar replied to some of these concerns on Twitter, but these responses do not really address their root issues. 1:45:06 Swap markets might sound like an answer, but the reality is that these just shove the liquidity requirements onto yet another party, assuming that they will provide massive amounts of liquidity for almost nothing in return. 1:45:20 That might work for small scale utility users or having liquidity available to arbitrage uncertainty around the peg. 1:45:28 I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that enough liquidity to cover the solution to the security budget problem without slippage is a given to say nothing of all the other users who would want to swap in and out. 1:45:43 This guy writes like he talks and it's a problem. 1:45:47 He then goes on to ignore the difference between the main chain reorg, which requires redoing work and energy expenditure versus a sidechain reorg, which does not. 1:45:58 Finally, he equates a random person for no logical or profit driven reason, giving money away with someone generating a profit with an activity they are the sole gatekeepers of. 1:46:11 And he ends this saying that, look, ultimately, I'm a Bitcoin maximalist. 1:46:14 I want what's best for Bitcoin. 1:46:16 I think Drivechains are stupid, dangerous and a waste of time, but I want to hear your thoughts on the subject. 1:46:22 Am I wrong on the points above? 1:46:24 Is there another reason that I should be against Drivechains that I've overlooked? 1:46:31 So, yeah, luckily, I mean, I wrote that down. 1:46:35 So I have my I found my tweet, because otherwise, as you say, it's rambling. 1:46:39 You know, you don't even know where to begin. 1:46:40 But I have a quote. 1:46:42 These shove the liquidity requirements onto someone. 1:46:48 They must provide massive amounts of liquidity for almost nothing in return. 1:46:52 But both halves of that are incorrect. 1:46:54 So there is no liquidity requirement like per se. 1:46:59 So no one has to provide anything. 1:47:02 Anyone with L1 coins, if you just own L1 coins in any wallet, you could at the drop of a hat participate in this scheme of of exchanging them for L2 coins. 1:47:16 So there's no they aren't locked up at all. 1:47:19 There's nothing. So does that make sense? 1:47:22 Like there's no like providing liquidity. 1:47:24 It's just the coins already exist. 1:47:27 You see what I mean? 1:47:28 Like if you may need like when you walk around, you maybe you only have some percent of your net worth in cash. 1:47:35 You only have so much cash and you only have so much in your checking account and you only have so much in a money market account if you're rich and you only have so much in whatever savings account. 1:47:50 I get the point. 1:47:51 None of the coins, any L1 coin could be. 1:47:54 There's no nothing is locked up. 1:47:56 So there is no providing liquidity. 1:47:57 It's not real. 1:47:58 And then the idea that they provide that they provide this, which is nothing, there is no providing. 1:48:04 There's no activity. 1:48:05 Everyone could do it at the drop of a hat or could not. 1:48:10 The idea that they do it for nothing in return is completely untrue. 1:48:13 Also, they charge. 1:48:16 They're the one charging the fee. 1:48:17 So they do it in return for a fee. 1:48:19 The fee covaries with market conditions. 1:48:21 So they get exactly what they. 1:48:27 It's completely both. 1:48:29 The whole description is incorrect. 1:48:32 Just to be clear, is this a reference to Sideshift.AI, which is a service that helps you swap coins between layers? 1:48:40 No, no. 1:48:41 But that is one, the fact that Sideshift.AI exists is partially a demonstration of this, that you could have Sideshift.AI or you could have Coinbase or you could have Kraken or you could have HTLCs or you could have some kind of protocol thing. 1:48:56 You could have some kind of thing that's completely peer to peer and decentralized. 1:49:01 Cross-chain atomic swap, HTLC, that will also work. 1:49:07 So the person on L1, they are the ones who have the more valued coin, they are the whatever, it's like when you go to whatever ladies night at the bar and they get in for free. 1:49:29 So the L1 coins are more desirable and they are the ones charging the fee for the L2 coins, which are trying to get back to L1. 1:49:39 So, yeah, probably my worst analogy yet, but they charge the fee. 1:49:47 It's not for nothing in return. 1:49:49 It's they set whatever they want in return and that's what they get until they get a buyer. 1:49:54 If they don't get a buyer, they get nothing. 1:49:55 So it's absurd. 1:49:58 I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that enough liquidity to cover the solution to the security budget. 1:50:02 Like, again, it's all misunderstood and confused. 1:50:04 So the security budget is solved by merged mining and it has nothing to do with deposits and withdrawals. 1:50:12 Even if the coins stop, if they stop moving at some point between L1 and L2, then the security budget would still be solved by Drivechain and it would still be in jeopardy of not being solved if there was no activity on the Drivechain L2. 1:50:32 So it has literally nothing at all to do with deposits and withdrawals. 1:50:37 I don't know why, but I think people confuse that a lot. 1:50:39 They confuse merged mining and the deposits and withdrawals. 1:50:45 I don't know. 1:50:46 I don't know why, but I think it's confusing. 1:50:48 So I think that's understandable. 1:50:49 But it's just they have nothing to do with it. 1:50:51 It's like, you know, they have nothing to do with each other. 1:50:56 It would be like if we said something, I shouldn't do any more analogies. 1:50:59 Not good. 1:50:59 Yeah, someone called you a sexist in the chat for the lady's nice analogy. 1:51:05 It's not me, it's the owners of the proprietors of the establishment. 1:51:09 OK, I just live in this world. 1:51:12 But why do you know about that? 1:51:14 I don't answer, please. 1:51:16 We'll do whatever it takes to end all forms of discrimination. 1:51:21 OK, ignore the difference between a main chain reorg, which requires redoing work and entering expenditure with a sidechain reorg, which does not. 1:51:26 But Blind Merged Mining is explicitly designed to do either thermodynamic work or L1 coins, equivalent value of either. 1:51:36 So that's that's the whole point is that you could do you could do one or the other and the amount would be the same. 1:51:44 So, you know, again, it's like. 1:51:48 He's saying they're different, but they're not they're not different at all. 1:51:50 It's the same amount of money. 1:51:55 I don't know why he would even say that, so I don't know. 1:51:57 I don't get it. 1:51:59 So, yeah, I don't know. 1:52:00 I think it's all silly anyway, because all this does, all Drivechain does is count to 13,000. 1:52:05 So it's going to it will inevitably happen anyway and probably soon. 1:52:10 And so all these people will just be super humiliated when it does. 1:52:13 I think that's my prediction. 1:52:15 Well, Jimmy Song talks about a fork, right? 1:52:18 So again, he's going to fork to stop Bitcoin, the Bitcoin network from counting to 13,000 over and over again. 1:52:26 Does he? 1:52:27 I don't think he even realizes anything. 1:52:29 I don't think he knows anything about like, you know, like what people want with. 1:52:32 If you bring back OP_CAT or TxHash or whatever, CTV. 1:52:39 It's very easy to simulate VIP 300 with a horribly hacky way that no one would want. 1:52:45 But it's very easy to just do. 1:52:47 You could, of course, do it now with just more trust. 1:52:50 If you trusted the miners more, you could just have a handshake deal to do the VIP 300 rules among miners. 1:52:56 And then it would be unpreventable. 1:52:59 Yeah, that's something I was going to ask you about. 1:53:01 Jimmy would have to go whack a mole and he'd have to find the places where miners had agreed that a UTXO is a sidechain and then try to fork himself off of those. 1:53:14 And he would be completely alone if he did that, I think. 1:53:19 It's kind of, you know. 1:53:21 It would be a hard fork because he would be breaking the heaviest chain rule. 1:53:24 Some people will be engaging and trying to understand what this is about and trying to come up with arguments. 1:53:30 They would rather argue in favor of forks. 1:53:33 And I can understand that, you know, saying the word fork gets you a lot of attention and you just launched a new book and you need as much attention as you can get. 1:53:42 And I'm talking about you, Jimmy. 1:53:44 You launched that Fiat destroys everything or whatever book. 1:53:48 He's got to let everyone know he's a real deal Bitcoiner. 1:53:52 There's more to it than that, of course. 1:53:54 Most of the Bitcoin culture is based around having defeated the large blockers in the scaling war. 1:54:01 So they just, everyone, anything to have a repeat of that. 1:54:05 The same reason why, you know, in Russia, they constantly talk about World War II over and over and over again because so many people died, one out of every seven or so. 1:54:13 So everything is framed. 1:54:15 Don't go there, please. 1:54:17 Just stop. 1:54:20 You need someone to tell you when to stop with analogies when they're bad. 1:54:24 Sure. 1:54:26 I get the point. 1:54:28 Yeah. 1:54:30 I think everyone else does. 1:54:32 Some people like dunking on big blockers. 1:54:34 And it's funny that you basically described yourself as a big blocker in that analogy. 1:54:38 Well, I, you know, I was not, I was never an L1 big blocker ever. 1:54:49 And I'm an L1 small blocker. 1:54:51 And there's lots of, enormous amounts of proof of that. 1:54:55 But what I'm saying is that the dynamic is someone wanted something, but we instead did the status quo. 1:55:09 We rejected SegWit2x. 1:55:11 And that's why we are what we are. 1:55:13 So that's what, that's like the tribal culture of Bitcoin during this, this, you know, this intermediate period. 1:55:21 This is what I, what will be known as the dark ages. 1:55:25 When historians write a book about Bitcoin, this will be like the middle age, the dark ages. 1:55:29 And then there'll be the renaissance, the sidechain renaissance. 1:55:33 I'm not sure I agree with you there because there's a lot of good stuff that happened in what you call the dark ages. 1:55:42 People started writing their own nodes and the importance of doing this became much more widespread. 1:55:48 Good stuff happened during the dark ages too, but it, you know, it also sucked. 1:55:52 Which dark ages had nodes and Raspberry Pis that you could use to run a node? 1:56:00 I mean that, you know, the European medieval dark ages, people invented like, you know, construction techniques and things. 1:56:10 And there were certain types of stuff. 1:56:12 But it's telling that a lot of that stuff was pushed out towards, I mean, now what are we talking about now? 1:56:18 But like, you know, it was pushed out to other places. 1:56:20 Like thank heavens for that one, what was that one guy who was in Baghdad or whatever who copied all these books before they were all destroyed. 1:56:30 He had them all in his library. 1:56:32 And then, yeah, if it weren't for that, that would have sucked. 1:56:37 Some Islamic guy in like the 1100s or something. 1:56:43 How is this relevant for our case? 1:56:45 I'm saying the dark ages weren't, you know, it wasn't so bad. 1:56:49 Luckily there was one guy who copied everything into a giant library so that he could save the day. 1:56:55 I think that library was called BIP 302. 1:57:01 That's still not a good analogy, Paul. 1:57:03 All right. 1:57:05 Well, you know. 1:57:07 You win some, you lose some. 1:57:09 We've spent a lot of time on this. 1:57:11 I think Shinobi does not want what's best for Bitcoin. 1:57:13 I think he wants what's best for his own career. 1:57:15 And I think it's a distant second what's best for Bitcoin. 1:57:21 And I think at this point he realizes that he's built so much of his reputation on hating this idea that if it ends up being the best idea in Bitcoin's history, there's no way that he will not be humiliated. 1:57:33 For that, which is not even what I want, but it's just literally not preventable at this point. 1:57:41 So I think that that is, I think it's all just mistakes. 1:57:45 But notice that Shinobi never says like shit coins on Bitcoin or whatever. 1:57:49 We're going to get to that. 1:57:51 So I tried so hard to not talk in the terms that are going to be presented and what's coming. 1:57:57 That's the Baltic Honey Badger debate. 1:58:01 You had a very high opinion of Baltic Honey Badger. 1:58:03 What happens if I'm not there? 1:58:05 It sucks. 1:58:07 What happened? 1:58:09 No, it was still incredible. 1:58:11 But before we get there, and I know I have been teasing this all night, but I saw that you said something along the lines that you can activate Drivechains on another altcoin like Litecoin or whatever. 1:58:24 I don't see Litecoin accepting to do this for the simple reason that they did Mimblewimble extension blocks. 1:58:30 And that's kind of a sidechain. 1:58:34 I don't think they're going to accept this. 1:58:36 But it seems like the Bitcoin Cash people are open to this. 1:58:40 And what's your opinion on this situation? 1:58:46 Well, I don't think it makes sense. 1:58:48 I'm open for anyone who wants to implement the idea. 1:58:53 And not only that, but BIP300 is very simple. 1:58:57 It's just kind of 13,000, like I said. 1:58:59 The complex stuff is done by the sidechain itself. 1:59:01 So we have a sidechain library. 1:59:03 We have minimal sidechains. 1:59:05 We have sidechain templates. 1:59:07 And we have example sidechains. 1:59:09 Most of the work went into that. 1:59:11 And those are already, like I was saying before, I honestly think those are just superior to what even the entire Lightning Network will be able to do in three or four years. 1:59:21 Beating the current state of the art in many ways. 1:59:25 So I think that you will, if anyone, if Litecoin adds BIP300, they will instantly get access to all of that. 1:59:35 Because the sidechains themselves can work on any BIP300 chain. 1:59:41 Does that make sense? 1:59:43 You know what I mean? 1:59:45 Each sidechain is connected to an L1. 1:59:47 They plug into an L1 block. 1:59:50 You plug them into a Litecoin block. 1:59:52 You still have a Zcash sidechain. 1:59:54 You have an EVM sidechain. 1:59:56 You have scaling. 1:59:58 Scale to 8 billion people tomorrow instantly. 2:00:00 Prediction markets. 2:00:02 Namecoin. 2:00:04 You get all that stuff. 2:00:06 So I would think some altcoin should try it. 2:00:08 And of course, there is that one altcoin that is pro BIP300 called SkyDoge that I have nothing to do with per se. 2:00:18 They hang out in our Telegram group and they are very funny. 2:00:20 Okay. 2:00:22 But where I was basically hinting is that if Bitcoin Cash activates Drivechains and they get some more activity, 2:00:30 basically this is a form of MEV, meaning that you're going to pervert the incentives of Bitcoin miners who use SHOT256 to switch to Bitcoin Cash. 2:00:45 Because basically you only have a certain number of ASIC miners that are being produced and deployed. 2:00:53 In the short run. 2:00:55 Yes. 2:00:57 But you see that actually happens if another chain uses the same proof of work or if any other application uses SHOT256D, that becomes popular. 2:01:09 So again, it's not really something that happens because of Drivechain, although I guess it could be the one cause of this particular event. 2:01:17 But it's not like... 2:01:19 It's not like... 2:01:21 Well, this is again, I think when people talk about the interactivity among... 2:01:27 They say, how will this affect Layer 1 Bitcoin? 2:01:31 To me, Layer 1 Bitcoin will be affected a lot. 2:01:35 Kind of no matter what we do. 2:01:38 So we want to make sure that it survives and wins. 2:01:42 If a different coin, like whatever, say Bitcoin Cash, becomes more popular and gets like 8 billion users. 2:01:48 Just imagine... 2:01:50 I know a lot of people that such a heretical thought that they can't even open their mind to it at all. 2:01:56 And they just want to do whatever it is they normally do instead of engaging in hypotheticals. 2:02:02 So if that's you, then good for you. 2:02:07 Imagine that actually somehow some other SHOT256 chain, such as Bitcoin Cash, they get 8 billion users. 2:02:17 Everyone's using their thing. 2:02:19 What happens to BTC in that scenario? 2:02:23 You think it stays at $30,000 a coin? 2:02:27 I'm asking you seriously. 2:02:29 What do you realistically imagine? 2:02:31 You wake up tomorrow and Bitcoin Cash has 8 billion users. 2:02:35 What happens to the price of BTC over the next year? 2:02:39 You know, it's the most extreme example you could have provided. 2:02:43 You could say, yeah, Bitcoin Cash gains like 20 million users overnight. 2:02:47 Because that might be feasible. 2:02:49 That's an average... 2:02:51 That's an extreme case to make a point. 2:02:55 Yeah, but that's not going to happen. 2:02:57 You even said that your estimation is that half the planet is going to be using Bitcoin every day. 2:03:04 Well, I'm saying that the... 2:03:08 No, I think it's... 2:03:10 8 billion people could be using... 2:03:16 I think it's possible that... 2:03:18 I don't know exactly when, but I think it's possible that 8 billion people could be using some form of blockchain UTXO payments. 2:03:26 Bitcoin has money and somewhat non-custodially in the sense of having no fixed custodian and no... 2:03:34 There's a transparent process like the law that applies to it. 2:03:40 Maybe it's not the best process, but they have a procedurally generated blockchain and they have keys. 2:03:48 I don't know how long that would take, but it could happen. 2:03:53 It doesn't matter. Let's say you get hit by a car and you wake up in a coma and it's 30 years from now and 8 billion people are using Bitcoin Cash. 2:04:01 Then what is the price of Bitcoin in that world? 2:04:05 Oh, that depends. 2:04:07 What is the price of BTC in that world? 2:04:11 It's hard for it to be zero because there's no reason for it to be zero. 2:04:17 It's still... 2:04:19 It's still a novelty the same way that baseball cards aren't zero. 2:04:23 I wouldn't call it a baseball card. 2:04:25 I mean... 2:04:27 Why not? 2:04:29 It depends on a lot of factors. 2:04:31 You can argue that it's the original chain and yeah, it goes back to the baseball cards. 2:04:37 But you can also argue that... 2:04:39 Yeah, but you could also say DigiCash is the original... 2:04:41 You could say whatever, like Haber's Tornado is the original chain. 2:04:46 You could say... 2:04:50 You could say that... 2:04:52 What is the thing that you could really say would be the earliest? 2:04:54 I don't know, but whatever it is, you could find it and say that's the earliest thing. 2:04:59 Okay, the odds of that happening are super unlikely, I think. 2:05:02 I know, but we can't say it's hypothetical. 2:05:05 It's just to make the point that L1 is affected by the success of a completely unrelated piece of software. 2:05:14 I agree with that. 2:05:16 Right. Yes, you do. 2:05:18 Because you didn't say, of course, it would still be $30,000 a coin. 2:05:22 You said, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, that's probably not going to happen. 2:05:25 Which is code for, I know that it would be 0.00% of world GDP and then change. 2:05:32 Plus a little, you know. 2:05:35 But this is not really about the price right now. 2:05:39 Well, I'm saying, I'm just saying it's affected. 2:05:42 So people say, what's VIP300, the ability to count to 13,000? 2:05:45 What's the effects going to be? 2:05:46 It's like, are you people paying any attention? 2:05:49 Like, I'm the one unaffecting you right now. 2:05:53 You're living in the affected world. 2:05:57 I think you can just put your head in the sand and just be like, oh, it doesn't matter if people like this software. 2:06:02 Or if we have developers in charge who care about their own career and they build impractical junk that gives them a paycheck. 2:06:15 It doesn't matter if all the podcasts are just people trying to podcast. 2:06:20 It doesn't matter if no one takes responsibility for Bitcoin actually succeeding. 2:06:25 Because it's all inevitable. 2:06:26 We're going to have the Citadel one day and it's going to be, it's going up forever. 2:06:29 Laura, there is no second best. 2:06:32 Infinity over 21 million. 2:06:34 I mean, you know. 2:06:36 We're part of infinity, don't you understand? 2:06:40 Okay, let me play an ad and then we can watch that Baltic Honey Badger debate. 2:06:44 Because honestly, I tried so hard tonight to not make points that were... 2:06:49 I really haven't seen it. 2:06:50 I wonder if people believe that or not. 2:06:51 I've seen like one or two tweets that have like a little quote, but I didn't really... 2:06:55 There were moments when I could have replied with Peter Todd's arguments or Giacomo's and I basically tried, okay, let me not say that. 2:07:03 Let me say something else. 2:07:06 So I tried very hard. 2:07:08 Let's take this 30 second break and then go to watching the debate. 2:07:14 CryptoSteel is the original Bitcoin cold storage backup and it's been innovating self-custody since 2013. 2:07:22 Designed and manufactured in Europe from the finest and most resistant stainless steel. 2:07:27 The CryptoSteel cassette and the CryptoSteel capsule are industry standards. 2:07:31 These cold storage devices are made to resist house fires, extreme floods and physical shocks. 2:07:38 You can also use CryptoSteel to store your important passwords, BIP39 passphrase or Nostr private keys. 2:07:45 Buy your CryptoSteel today from CryptoSteel.com and use promo code BTCTKVR to get a 10% discount. 2:07:53 CryptoSteel, secure your Bitcoin like an OG. 2:08:02 Okay, now what you should know is that when I play the video, you're going to be muted. 2:08:07 Okay, let's do it. 2:08:08 And the moment when you start talking, I'm going to pause the video so you can comment. 2:08:13 Okay. 2:08:15 Okay. 2:08:18 The next on the name, I've got John Carvalho to welcome to the stage. 2:08:22 You guys know who John is as well. 2:08:24 So please round of applause for John. 2:08:27 Sergay is next up. 2:08:28 Sergay, please, would you take your seat at the panel? 2:08:32 And last but by no means least, my fellow countryman, Ben Ark. 2:08:36 Ladies and gentlemen, thank you. 2:08:40 Can we set the time? 2:08:52 Hello, hello. 2:08:53 Hi, gentlemen. 2:08:55 Hello. 2:08:56 Thank you for joining me this afternoon. 2:08:58 I was just told the topic is controversial opinions, unpopular opinions. 2:09:05 So where should we begin? 2:09:10 May I suggest something? 2:09:12 Last year, there was Paul Sztorc here. 2:09:14 And so one of us will rage quit Bitcoin before a year. 2:09:18 So I think we should understand who actually. 2:09:25 Okay, Paul. 2:09:26 So you're going to rage quit Bitcoin by the end of the year. 2:09:29 That's the prediction. 2:09:30 Because I didn't go to Baltic Honey Badger because I had to go to TapConf instead. 2:09:34 No. 2:09:36 Because that's exactly what he said. 2:09:38 He said he's not here. 2:09:39 So therefore he's going to rage quit. 2:09:42 Yeah. 2:09:43 I mean, because I didn't know that. 2:09:45 What I didn't know is that Baltic Honey Badger is always the first weekend. 2:09:50 I never kind of put this together. 2:09:51 It's always the first weekend in September or something. 2:09:54 Anyway, let's continue watching. 2:09:56 Musical chair game. 2:09:58 Somebody will rage quit here. 2:10:00 Musical chair. 2:10:02 Is ordinals and inscriptions a dangerous place to start in an unpopular opinion panel? 2:10:08 They're dead already, right? 2:10:09 Now we hate Drivechains. 2:10:13 Drivechains to start. 2:10:16 Okay, who would like to take that? 2:10:18 I would love to hear your unpopular opinion about Drivechains. 2:10:22 Drivechains are shit coins. 2:10:26 Yeah. 2:10:28 But that's popular, John. 2:10:34 Do you want to comment on this? 2:10:36 Well, I mean, like, I don't know. 2:10:37 It doesn't, it's, I know, you know, how big that room is. 2:10:41 So he got one, one guy to clap. 2:10:43 Like. 2:10:44 It's not about the claps. 2:10:45 It's about what he, what John Carvalho said that Drivechains. 2:10:48 Yeah, but I mean, John Carvalho has this belief that the peg won't hold, which is based on his inability 2:10:56 to, like, he, there's, it's an analogy of like an ATM. 2:11:01 So the ATM will always give you, if you put $20 in, it will give you $20 credit to your checking account. 2:11:11 Or it will take $20 out and give you a $20 bill. 2:11:14 Now, sometimes it might charge fees. 2:11:17 And, you know, there's usually the way it works is like, there's a network of ATMs that you're, that don't charge your fees. 2:11:23 But if you go outside or if you have to use the one in the foreign country or something, it charges you more. 2:11:29 And then what I also stress is that most people will not use the ATM. 2:11:34 They will not use the BIP300 rail because it is slow and it is designed not to be used for laypeople. 2:11:42 It is a special thing that is supposed to be used by whoever is willing to be patient for three months, which is not going to be the end user. 2:11:53 And so what I'm saying is you could be out, you go out into the, you know, you go to a, you're going to concert or something. 2:11:58 You go to whatever, you're going to Taylor Swift's concert and you get some cash out of the ATM. 2:12:03 And then you, someone, you meet someone in the audience who says, oh, I don't kind of, I don't have any cash. 2:12:11 I'll Venmo you, but I need, I want, I want some cash. 2:12:15 And you may not, you may not charge them, you know, you might give it to them at an even thing, but you also might charge them. 2:12:22 You might say, listen, I'll give you $60 worth of cash, but I want, I want $61 Venmo or whatever. 2:12:30 But that's a good thing. 2:12:31 All that just makes it so that everyone can get different, can do the conversions at different. 2:12:38 They can do the conversions at different speeds and with whoever they want on their own terms. 2:12:45 I don't think, I think John Grava is unwittingly contributing to the misunderstanding of what, you know, like the shit coins on Bitcoin thing by saying this. 2:12:55 But I, but this is what he said on Twitter. 2:12:57 I think John also like, it's like most of his career, similar to Peter Todd, where it's like the career is based around being contrarian and you get attention that way. 2:13:06 And you get, you know, Peter Todd gets flown around the world and people put him up in different hotels and stuff. 2:13:12 And I don't think, but he's like, he's on this thing and you see them sort of both laughing about this, but it's like they, this is like before Peter Todd's tweet saying that he may not actually understand the idea fully. 2:13:26 So this is like pre him admitting that, and yet this whole time I paid him months ago to write this, to write this explanation of what is wrong with the idea. 2:13:39 And he's still, to this day has not done that. 2:13:44 So. 2:13:45 Okay, I'll tell you that you paid him to discredit himself because you knew he would not come. 2:13:50 Okay. 2:13:50 I'm being conspirational. 2:13:52 Yeah, well, I mean, I think it's, well, what does it say? 2:13:54 If you, if someone says they believe something and I say, okay, why don't you write down what you believe? 2:14:01 And he says, I'm busy. 2:14:02 And then he picked that the number he charged us. 2:14:06 We didn't fight it at all. 2:14:09 Okay. 2:14:09 Paul, he said, I will write it if you pay me this amount. 2:14:13 And we said, okay, we'll pay you half now. 2:14:14 And then half after you finish. 2:14:16 This is a completely standard terms for that kind of thing. 2:14:20 But I mean, yeah, I mean, Drivechain, they're not, you know, that they are not though. 2:14:24 Right. 2:14:25 Vlad, right. 2:14:25 We don't need to explain why do we need, do you think we should explain for the audience? 2:14:29 Of course. 2:14:31 Why they're not. 2:14:32 Why are Drivechains not shit coins? 2:14:34 But you know, well, you explain it or no. 2:14:37 I can explain it. 2:14:38 Yes, I think you should. 2:14:40 Basically the mantra or the motive, the whole movement of peg sidechains is to have the features of shit coins without the shit coin itself and have Bitcoin that's being locked on the base layer and this being issued on the second layer or the sidechain, call it whatever. 2:14:56 And you're going to have that amount of liquidity being used on every sidechain. 2:15:01 So you don't really have shit coins. 2:15:05 You have Bitcoin, which is being used on a different layer. 2:15:08 Just like LBTC. 2:15:10 Exactly. 2:15:11 It's not liquid. 2:15:12 And I guess it's unfair to compare it to lightning. 2:15:15 I think it's exactly fair. 2:15:17 I think it's exactly the same. 2:15:19 You lock, you send, you spend the, you have the funding transaction on L1, which is the two or two multi-signature output. 2:15:24 And then it shows up in the L2s. 2:15:29 It shows up in the lightning network. 2:15:31 It's exactly the same. 2:15:33 But I guess there's also the uncertainty and the assumption that people are going to be using these sidechains to issue their own shit coins, be them ordinary. 2:15:42 You can already do that on lightning also. 2:15:44 So it's again, it's exactly the same. 2:15:46 But that's what tarot is and what RGB is. 2:15:49 But in the lack of a block space limitation, because these sidechains might have a larger block size, faster block times and whatever, you can open the floodgates for a lot of spam. 2:16:00 But I guess it's all fair as long as they pay fees and the miners. 2:16:04 Yeah, L2 also, like open timestamps also could have an unlimited amount of spam. 2:16:10 Peter Todd's project, but L1 doesn't see it. 2:16:14 So that's why we have to stay laser focused on cost of running an L1 node and everything else does not matter. 2:16:22 Okay, Paul, new rule with the video. 2:16:25 So far, I stopped it twice and it was my own initiative. 2:16:28 From now on, I'm going to let it play and you tell me when to stop. 2:16:32 And then we'll talk. 2:16:36 Now with Paul. 2:16:38 Drivechains, the whole point of them is to not be shit coins. 2:16:42 Although if they become a shit coin, then that's probably because they failed. 2:16:45 Can we define Drivechain for the audience members that may not know what that is? 2:16:49 Well, they are paying me to go write a blog post on this, which may be a little delayed. 2:16:54 But the definition basically is that you go and have two BIPs, BIP300/301. 2:17:02 BIP300 says that you go have a special type of transaction output, which miners can vote to decide where the money goes. 2:17:09 Obviously, you'd want to go put your money into that. 2:17:11 And then the second BIP, BIP301, says that you have some kind of way of what basically is like voting on the blockchain 2:17:22 by paying this special type of output to be spent. 2:17:25 And that special type of output basically creates a thing that can only be done once per block. 2:17:30 So that if you or I try to do the same bid, but in different ways, only one of us is going to wind up paying. 2:17:39 And then as for the Drivechain thing, just fill in the details. 2:17:41 It's really easy. 2:17:46 I think I partially understood that. 2:17:48 Yeah, it's a hard block to write. 2:17:49 So it's a shit coin. 2:17:50 It isn't a flushed out idea. 2:17:52 No one's written source code that actually does the whole thing. 2:17:55 Gotcha. 2:17:56 Giacomo, you always have colorful opinions. 2:17:58 Well, I... 2:18:01 Okay, you raised your hand. 2:18:02 Yeah, you were muted. 2:18:04 You have muted me. 2:18:05 So I don't know. 2:18:07 That's what Jitsi does. 2:18:08 Okay, so I'll raise the hand then next time because I clicked that button. 2:18:12 Okay, so yeah. 2:18:15 So Peter Phan's description was not that accurate, but it was okay. 2:18:21 Miners don't like literally vote. 2:18:23 There's an SPV proof. 2:18:25 So it's literally exactly like confirmations. 2:18:29 So it's the same way that if you, whatever you, whether or not you are in the longest chain and whether or not your transaction gets confirmed. 2:18:37 The same sense that that is a vote is the sense in which BIP300 is a vote, miners vote. 2:18:43 It's only the work. 2:18:45 It's only the 13,000 confirmations that gates whether or not the transaction goes through or not. 2:18:49 And it's, of course, slightly more different than that. 2:18:51 I think it was interesting that, again, he did that joke and we didn't really hear anyone laugh because people were genuinely very interested in what a Drivechain is. 2:19:00 And they think it's probably not. 2:19:02 It's probably more to it than something where miners just have all the coins, which of course there is. 2:19:10 So we could get into that, but I don't know how long, how long, about how long is this? 2:19:16 32 minutes and we are only three minutes in. 2:19:20 But yeah, I think he was describing the details, but he didn't explain like what the point of it is, which is that you have freedom to go to a different piece of software. 2:19:33 So it's developers compete and the end user wins. 2:19:38 But that was OK. 2:19:40 I mean, he didn't understand 301 really that much. 2:19:43 There is a bid and stuff, but I think this is a kind of funny video that people will play in the future. 2:19:56 I'd love to hear more. 2:19:58 This is a Breedlove, right? 2:20:00 And he's moderating and I'd love to know if he got something out of that explanation. 2:20:07 No, it's funny because Breedlove wanted to start with ordinal inscriptions and he was cut short and then he was out of his depth. 2:20:15 And he was like, so what's a Drivechain? 2:20:17 Can anyone explain that? 2:20:18 I think he seemed genuinely curious, which I think is the most we can ask of anyone who doesn't already know something. 2:20:28 You want me to keep playing? 2:20:30 Yeah, yeah, yeah. 2:20:32 You're going to be muted, but you know what to do. 2:20:35 I agree with people. 2:20:37 The original purpose was not to create shit coins. 2:20:40 So the original idea was many shit coins are created because people are trying to experiment with new ideas, new architecture, new trade off between privacy, scalability and decentralization. 2:20:51 So we want to experiment. 2:20:53 Unfortunately, changing Bitcoin is hard. 2:20:55 So we are forced to print money. 2:20:57 We would like not to, but we are forced because we want to experiment with technology. 2:21:01 So the idea of the sidechains by blockchain people originally was actually you don't need to print money in order to experiment. 2:21:09 You can create another infrastructure that will just reuse the same money. 2:21:13 So we can basically go to peg Bitcoin to this other system and then back. 2:21:22 So you can bootstrap new technology without bootstrapping new money. 2:21:26 The problem is that there is no way to go back. 2:21:28 You can easily go one way. 2:21:30 Like, for example, you burn one Bitcoin and you get a side coin. 2:21:34 That's one way. 2:21:35 But how do you go back? 2:21:36 The point is that the actual Bitcoin system is not aware of the side system. 2:21:41 And if it was, that would be very bad because in that case, everything bad that happens to the side system will directly influence Bitcoin consensus. 2:21:49 So the idea of the original sidechain idea was miners. 2:21:54 We already trust them for canonical ordering. 2:21:56 So we may as well just trust them also for going back. 2:22:01 So we put this coin in a kind of output that miners in a majority over time can vote to unlock to a certain direction. 2:22:14 The problem is that miners are under no obligation to follow any kind of logic like this. 2:22:21 Like, for example, miners could mine invalid transaction. 2:22:26 OK, go. 2:22:28 OK, that was pretty good. 2:22:31 At the beginning, he was a little misleading there when he said the original plan was not Chikcoins and Bitcoin because it kind of made it seem like I had changed it to a new plan that was Chikcoins. 2:22:40 I think I'm just following the original plan. 2:22:43 It's interesting that he remembers there was a time when it was not an opcode and it was instead something else. 2:22:50 It was like an opcode like thing that was this was many years ago. 2:22:55 And he went on Twitter and then he was criticized by people because in the BIP there was no opcode. 2:23:01 So people said, yo, you haven't even read this BIP. 2:23:05 Now, in a somewhat ironic way, he it has we changed it since back to a BIP, to an opcode. 2:23:15 And now he is he kind of wanted to avoid saying that there, which is kind of funny to me. 2:23:21 Only funny to me. But now he's getting into the meat of it. 2:23:24 He did a very good job of explaining like what mostly what the idea was. 2:23:29 But he's saying the miners have no reason at all to process the withdrawals honorably. 2:23:34 But that's not true. They they get they get the fees of the sidechain and they get the. 2:23:41 The value add of having a coin that can do everything versus a coin that can do nothing. 2:23:48 And every coin that is sent, you have to be enticed. 2:23:52 It's kind of like a hotel, you know, like the hotel manager can maybe do anything. 2:23:57 Like they could have you thrown out. Security could throw you out. 2:24:01 Or the you know, they could call the police and have you thrown off. 2:24:06 So the hotel manager is in charge of the hotel, but they have to entice you to come. 2:24:10 And as they come to this hotel, the user would say, really, I like it at my own house. 2:24:15 Or they have to entice you to come to your restaurant. 2:24:17 You know, they could poison the food or whatever, but they want to entice. 2:24:22 They want customers. So they they fight to attract people. 2:24:27 And they are under no literal obligation. 2:24:31 But there's the whole scheme is set up so that it's all automated if they work, if it works perfectly. 2:24:36 But if it's if something goes wrong and it will be a nightmare for everyone involved. 2:24:42 So I'm sure he's going to explain now why it is that he thinks the miners will miss withdraw the coins. 2:24:50 But even so, this is going to miss the point because it's the end user's decision what security model they want to. 2:24:58 They choose, you know, they choose for their own for themselves and for their own money. 2:25:02 And I have a separate argument that I think actually the Lightning Network is more vulnerable to minor theft. 2:25:07 This is just having the miners like basically co-sign something that the sidechain software writes, 2:25:12 which is this one hash in return for huge amounts of money. 2:25:16 So they have to do basically nothing. But let's hear what he has to say. 2:25:21 But we will just invalidate it so they will lose money if they vote to just move money around a different way. 2:25:27 We cannot invalidate that because we are not even supposed to run the consensus of this other chain. 2:25:33 So Blockstream partially abandoned this initial idea of miner based stuff and they moved to a fixed federation liquid. 2:25:41 And Postdoc took this idea and said, since we are trusting miners already, let's just simplify it and trust them completely. 2:25:48 I think that the original reason was not to have shitcoins, but then they had to do heavy marketing. 2:25:55 And so now the new narrative is you have token. 2:25:58 And also I think that the most shitcoinist things of dry change is the style. 2:26:03 They are using full blown shitcoin style to promote something that we're supposed to be avoiding shitcoin. 2:26:09 And if the soft fork will be attempted and fail, it will actually create a shitcoin. 2:26:13 So it may be. 2:26:15 So the Drivechain system is effectively a peg to Bitcoin, it sounds like. 2:26:19 It's meant to be, yes. 2:26:23 You raised your hand once. 2:26:24 Yes, well, I don't really know what to make of any of that. 2:26:29 The marketing is in the style of an altcoin. 2:26:33 I don't really understand what that means. 2:26:35 He also implied that you have a token or something. 2:26:38 Yeah, I don't know what that means either. 2:26:43 Are you trying to sell the Drivechain token? 2:26:46 I don't know what that even is referring to. 2:26:48 There is no Drivechain token. 2:26:51 Do you want me to rewind that so we can listen to it? 2:26:55 Just think about it. 2:26:57 So yeah, I don't know. 2:26:59 I don't know this about the... 2:27:01 He's still saying like the original idea versus the new idea. 2:27:05 There is no such thing. 2:27:12 So I don't know. 2:27:14 But let alone multiple. 2:27:16 That seems to be what he's saying. 2:27:18 I don't know. 2:27:19 Maybe he's referring to Bitcoin Hivemind or something. 2:27:21 But again, that has nothing to do with... 2:27:24 That's a completely different thing. 2:27:27 That would already... 2:27:28 Even if it was like... 2:27:30 That's a completely different thing. 2:27:32 And that's required for the peer-to-peer oracle to work. 2:27:34 That's basically like staking a variable amount of coins. 2:27:39 But that's... 2:27:40 I don't even know. 2:27:41 I'm not sure who's listening at this point. 2:27:43 And if you are, you're kind of a hero. 2:27:45 Because it's been two and a half hours. 2:27:48 And we're not even done yet. 2:27:50 But Paul mentioned Hivemind. 2:27:53 And I guess that's your prediction market sidechain? 2:27:57 Yes. 2:28:01 That's all? 2:28:02 Yeah, but that's not like a token that is like... 2:28:07 That is... 2:28:09 Like even if that project didn't exist, 2:28:12 it would still be of crucial value for Bitcoin to do sidechains 2:28:17 in order to survive. 2:28:18 In order to have privacy, scalability, etc. 2:28:21 So yeah, I don't know. 2:28:24 I don't even know what he's talking about. 2:28:27 Okay. 2:28:28 Well, let's go on. 2:28:31 And this came up in a recent conversation I had 2:28:33 with the Twilight of Gold series actually. 2:28:36 Luke Groman. 2:28:37 He stated it as an economic law that all pegs break. 2:28:42 If everything is falling in price against Bitcoin over the long run, 2:28:45 isn't it inevitable that it would break? 2:28:47 Crypto doesn't necessarily mean that all pegs... 2:28:49 Like you could hypothetically design things in crypto 2:28:51 that are not breakable. 2:28:53 But the big problem is with Drivechains is... 2:28:55 So a close analogy is actually like SegWit. 2:28:59 When SegWit was introduced, 2:29:00 SegWit meant that you'd have a whole bunch of coins 2:29:03 with what, according to the previous rule, 2:29:05 where anyone can spend outputs. 2:29:07 Well, why wasn't that previously insecure? 2:29:10 Why couldn't miners renege on that? 2:29:12 Well, because the entire world said, 2:29:13 hey, we like these sacred rules. 2:29:15 We're going to run nodes that validate those rules. 2:29:17 Under that circumstance, 2:29:19 where we're all validating these rules, 2:29:21 SegWit's totally secure. 2:29:23 Because from the point of view of all the people in this room 2:29:25 who run nodes, which I'm hoping is everyone, 2:29:29 they're not going to allow transactions that steal those coins. 2:29:32 Drivechain skips that part and says, 2:29:34 hey, we can just have new rules, 2:29:36 but we don't actually need to enforce them. 2:29:39 If miners go steal the money, 2:29:40 I guess maybe everyone will go stop it or something like that. 2:29:43 But when you have 200 Drivechains, 2:29:47 that's a total mess when you start having thefts happen 2:29:49 and people are advocating on Twitter, 2:29:52 no, no, no, we've got to go run the UASF 2:29:54 to go prevent this $100 million theft 2:29:56 of Drivechain number 106 that no one really cares about. 2:30:01 I think Peter Todd should know better than to say some of those things, so I don't know 2:30:03 how to do them, but I think I'll try in order. 2:30:05 So SegWit, the new rules, they don't have to be enforced by the entire world and everyone 2:30:09 in this room. 2:30:10 It's only enough. 2:30:11 Enough of the people would be doing it so that breaking the rules would be too difficult 2:30:17 from a coordination point of view, game theory point of view. 2:30:21 You just have so many people. 2:30:24 So it has to be all the miners plus a critical mass of users, which can be very, very small. 2:30:28 It can be very small in the same way that if you have a Thanksgiving, well, maybe I 2:30:32 shouldn't do analogies because people don't like them, but Thanksgiving dinner, someone 2:30:35 says, oh, let's have it here. 2:30:37 Everyone wants to be in the same network. 2:30:39 So it can be a small intransigent minority. 2:30:41 It doesn't have to be the entire world. 2:30:43 We're all running the SegWit. 2:30:45 It doesn't have to be the entire world. 2:30:48 It doesn't have to be the entire world. 2:30:50 We're all running the SegWit. 2:30:52 That's not the case. 2:30:54 But then at the end, it's very strange for him not to say that there is no, there is 2:31:00 nothing to the BIP300 rules because of course there is. 2:31:04 That's the counting to 13,000 part is there. 2:31:08 And that's the whole point. 2:31:10 If we didn't need to do that, then there would be no BIP300 and there would be no conversation. 2:31:16 And then we would already have Drivechains. 2:31:18 They would be fully trusting miner because what BIP300 does is it puts the miners on 2:31:23 a short leash for the deposits and withdrawal. 2:31:26 So if we did, we already have, we would already have Drivechains. 2:31:34 There'd be no BIP300 and there'd be no need for one. 2:31:37 So I don't know. 2:31:38 He should know better than to say a lot of that was okay. 2:31:41 I noticed that he did say that the peg, he completely ignored what John Carvalho said 2:31:45 about the peg not holding. 2:31:47 So he's clearly just disagrees with John Carvalho, but he knows that he's on the anti-drive 2:31:53 chain team. 2:31:54 So he doesn't want to like bring it up. 2:31:56 He's a breed love, asked about it specifically. 2:31:59 And he said like, well, forget about what John said and listen to what I have to say. 2:32:04 But what he said was flatly incorrect in my opinion. 2:32:09 But now we're going to hear more about him saying that we're completely trusting the 2:32:15 miners and there is no, there is nothing gating the withdrawals, which is false. 2:32:23 There's also someone in the chat. 2:32:25 His name is SanisDoker or something. 2:32:28 SanisDoker. 2:32:30 And he says he was referring to the root stock Drivechains token called RBTC. 2:32:35 It's technically a one-to-one peg, but I suppose it could de-peg. 2:32:41 That's what he had to add. 2:32:44 Okay. 2:32:45 But how is that? 2:32:46 Is that a token? 2:32:47 Like, I don't know what that means though. 2:32:49 Isn't that just Bitcoin on root stock? 2:32:52 So how is that a token? 2:32:54 You can't like sell that to other people and like use that to raise money. 2:33:01 Yeah. 2:33:02 Anyway, let's keep watching this. 2:33:06 I mean, it just creates a gigantic mess for a system that really should be pretty boring. 2:33:13 I think the scary part is, of the whole Drivechain debate, is kind of reminded a lot of us how 2:33:21 miners can sneak stuff in. 2:33:24 And the mining itself probably needs to be a bit more decentralized, which is a good thing that 2:33:28 they shed light on that. 2:33:29 And then projects like Stratum V2, which was Matt Crello's first initial criticism of Drivechains. 2:33:35 And I think that's healthy and good that that debate was had. 2:33:38 And it sheds light on that as an issue. 2:33:41 Maybe to add a little more nuance to my, you know, Drivechains or shit coins comment, 2:33:45 and with some context from what your answers were. 2:33:50 You raised your hand. 2:33:51 Yeah, I know. 2:33:52 I just want to say that whatever, like everyone, Stratum V2 is just, you know, 2:33:58 I'm happy to support Stratum V2. 2:34:00 I think it doesn't even go far enough, but I also think it's irrelevant. 2:34:03 So it's irrelevant. 2:34:04 But this is the thing, that this is what everyone is going to say. 2:34:06 They're going to say, after they realize how good this idea is, they're going to be like, 2:34:11 well, it needs Stratum V2. 2:34:13 Because everyone, you know, success has many fathers, you may have heard. 2:34:16 So they all want to be like, okay, without me doing Stratum V2, we would never have had safe Drivechains. 2:34:22 I could explain that if you want, but we should probably just keep going. 2:34:26 I'm a bit confused because the intentions of Stratum V2 is to empower every individual miner 2:34:32 to vote and opt out from being co-opted into something that they don't like. 2:34:38 They already are, though. 2:34:40 They absolutely are already. 2:34:44 How easy is it to switch mining pools? 2:34:47 Drop of a hat. 2:34:49 Costs nothing. 2:34:50 But you also had that case from, which mining pool was it? 2:34:54 F2 pool. 2:34:56 F2 pool, yes, sure. 2:34:57 The one that collected a very large fee. 2:34:59 20 Bitcoin. 2:35:01 Exactly. 2:35:02 And the owners of the pool decided to return it without any input from the actual workers. 2:35:08 Yes. 2:35:11 Well, the owners of the pool should do whatever is in the best interest of their members. 2:35:18 They have no choice in the long run. 2:35:21 But it's not necessarily clear that it's hard to say what is in the best interest because maybe. 2:35:30 You don't know. 2:35:32 It's hard to say. 2:35:33 Maybe to behave in a dishonorable way would discredit the pool in some other way. 2:35:39 And so it's the pool administrator's task to keep their customers. 2:35:47 And if they do that, it's their decision to make. 2:35:51 It's their call. 2:35:53 They do this 24-7, 365. 2:35:57 And they know they have a relationship with their members and clients. 2:36:02 And they know the industry. 2:36:04 And if they made the wrong decision, then F2 pool will be destroyed soon because everyone will leave. 2:36:12 But if they made the right decision, then it will grow or whatever. 2:36:16 So that's just kind of the reality. 2:36:19 It's kind of like to keep it could be seen as dishonorable. 2:36:25 And that could make it seem like the pool is not acting in Bitcoin's best interest because it's clearly a mistake. 2:36:33 And we want people to have a positive experience when they use Bitcoin. 2:36:38 So in the grand scheme of things, it could have reduced the net worth of the mining machines. 2:36:46 It's theoretically possible. 2:36:49 But keeping it would have been not in the best financial interest. 2:36:53 But in any way, it's their call to make. 2:36:55 And they suffer the consequences if they make a mistake or if they do the right thing. 2:37:01 Okay. 2:37:02 Should we continue? 2:37:04 I don't see how Stratum V2 would have helped at all. 2:37:06 It's too late by the time. 2:37:07 Stratum V2 helps with job selection maybe. 2:37:13 Like if you still have the 100 block maturity. 2:37:20 I would be interested to know if someone could write down an example with like a technical example of how Stratum V2 would have changed that at all. 2:37:27 I'd be very interested to read that. 2:37:30 What's the Stratum V2 do that just being able to leave the pool doesn't do? 2:37:37 Let's continue. 2:37:38 This is going to take about 100 hours at this rate. 2:37:42 Like to break it down into like more abstract primitives, stability is not a quality of a thing. 2:37:48 It's a service. 2:37:49 And so you can't. 2:37:51 There's no atomic way to peg. 2:37:53 And so when you have two separate networks like as Jaco mentioned that are not aware of each other and shouldn't be aware of each other. 2:37:58 Although I think Drivechain is not completely sound. 2:38:01 Symmetrical. 2:38:02 In that sense. 2:38:03 The Drivechain is aware of the main chain but not the other way around. 2:38:05 So the service of stability is provided by the escrow of the miners. 2:38:09 And so there's no real enforcement of stability of the peg. 2:38:14 And thus you're either going to have an outcome. 2:38:17 And they're both bad outcomes. 2:38:18 Where eventually you lose the peg. 2:38:21 And it trends like counterparty. 2:38:22 Where it just kind of trends to zero. 2:38:24 Or even worse potentially is the sidechain. 2:38:28 Now imagine say. 2:38:29 Let's say Roger Ver was right. 2:38:30 And we have the sidechain that is you know infinitely increasing or increasing the demand of the users and block size. 2:38:37 Say that that becomes more popular than Bitcoin. 2:38:40 And more everybody moves their coins to the Drivechain. 2:38:43 How does that express? 2:38:44 What do we do about that? 2:38:45 Is that a problem? 2:38:46 What if we had that spread over many Drivechains? 2:38:49 And now we have many Drivechains. 2:38:51 So this stability as a service thing is a good way to look at it. 2:38:55 Because you can't have an atomic peg. 2:38:57 And you can't. 2:38:58 Nothing is stable. 2:38:59 Because you're just implying counter currencies. 2:39:02 So thus they are shit coins. 2:39:04 Because you're converting your Bitcoin to the side coin right to the escrowed Bitcoin. 2:39:09 And so thus there's no peg of the value. 2:39:12 There's no transfer of value. 2:39:16 Yeah. 2:39:17 I guess just to be contrary with the group. 2:39:20 Frankly I don't have a strong opinion. 2:39:23 Go on Paul. 2:39:25 I mean I don't know. 2:39:26 I would love to know if anyone can get anything out of that. 2:39:29 I mean I could give us. 2:39:31 I think we could hire John to give the same speech about ATMs and say. 2:39:36 You know the stability is a service of the ATM. 2:39:41 And there's never any point where it's literally pegged. 2:39:44 If he would use the software he would see if he deposits 13 coins or whatever. 2:39:49 You get 13 coins come out the other side every time. 2:39:54 As Giacomo correctly said. 2:39:57 It's aware in one direction. 2:40:00 And then when you withdraw if you withdraw 15 coins. 2:40:03 And you have a main chain fee in there. 2:40:04 But if you withdraw do you get exactly that many coins out. 2:40:08 So it's not a service of the miners at all. 2:40:12 The miners bless the withdrawal transaction ID. 2:40:16 The miners find blocks. 2:40:18 But the protocol just the software just automatically credits you. 2:40:23 Same as when you take $20 out of an ATM. 2:40:25 It takes $20 out of your checking account. 2:40:29 So I don't know what to say about that. 2:40:30 But we'll see what Sergey has to say. 2:40:34 I don't have an opinion about Drivechains. 2:40:35 But one of the things that I'm noticing with this debate. 2:40:38 And I've seen many of the other things that we often argue over in the Bitcoin space. 2:40:45 There's always a fundamental debate between the trade-offs. 2:40:51 Of whether or not to keep Bitcoin more pure in some way. 2:40:57 In terms of decentralization or in terms of security and so on. 2:41:00 Oftentimes on the other side the people that are arguing against the purity side. 2:41:07 Are arguing for some kind of benefits. 2:41:09 Some kind of use cases. 2:41:11 Some kind of people and so on. 2:41:14 We should I think be aware that the idea that we should keep Bitcoin pure. 2:41:23 Is a very logically consistent opinion. 2:41:26 But it is at tension with Bitcoin maximalism. 2:41:30 Because Bitcoin maximalism is the idea that when it comes to internet money. 2:41:34 Bitcoin is the be all end all. 2:41:37 It's going to be everything for everyone. 2:41:39 And so there is tension here. 2:41:41 Because if we decide that we need to keep Bitcoin pure. 2:41:45 And for that reason we're willing to trade off the following things. 2:41:48 That means that these things can appear in other situations. 2:41:53 Security I think is probably the best example. 2:41:56 There's often this trade-off between security and utility scale. 2:42:03 Very often things require lesser amounts of security. 2:42:06 And then we see them appear. 2:42:08 Other chains that are less secure. 2:42:10 But where that level of security is useful for certain things. 2:42:15 Certain things that certain people want to do. 2:42:19 I think there's a certain tension there. 2:42:21 That we should be aware of. 2:42:24 I think it's fair when you think about people on Bitcoin Twitter. 2:42:28 That are I guess the midwit type saying that argument. 2:42:31 But you can see here we have nuanced arguments. 2:42:34 We have rational arguments about what the risks are. 2:42:37 It's not just about oh nothing new. 2:42:39 Or nothing complex. 2:42:41 It's just I don't need that and what you're saying isn't true. 2:42:44 So why are we doing this? 2:42:46 There is an inherent risk with the ideology of the maximalist. 2:42:50 In that Bitcoin is perfect and then shouldn't progress. 2:42:53 And it's not. It's a work in progress. 2:42:55 And if we want this thing to be the backbone of the future world's economy. 2:42:58 Which I do personally. 2:43:00 I want everything to be on Bitcoin. 2:43:02 That's what everyone transacts value through. 2:43:04 How are we going to do that? How are we going to scale? 2:43:07 There's a bunch of fundamental things in lightning for example. 2:43:10 Which needs to be fixed in order to make it easy for people to run in a self-sovereign way. 2:43:13 But then how do we cater for the world? 2:43:16 And then I suppose Drivechain. 2:43:18 They were trying to say that look if you have this system. 2:43:21 Where we entrust miners as a federation. 2:43:24 Then you can have these like 200 extra chains. 2:43:28 In which you can have this different type of economic commerce. 2:43:31 And I think you know when we had the block wars. 2:43:35 We did decide that off-chain scaling was probably the way to go. 2:43:40 Rather than making the blocks bigger. 2:43:42 And if we do need the whole world to be transacting using Bitcoin. 2:43:45 I mean maybe that's not what you want. 2:43:47 Maybe you're just like no I want just Bitcoin just to work for us. 2:43:49 I think a problem with the idea that Drivechain scale is. 2:43:52 Computers are a lot cheaper than humans. 2:43:55 And to the extent Drivechain scale. 2:43:58 They scale in a way which has risks of very ugly politics. 2:44:04 Because you know Drivechains will probably go fail. 2:44:07 And in the process of failing. 2:44:09 People will go and use a backup option. 2:44:11 Of arguing for things like user activated soft forks. 2:44:13 Go fix that problem. 2:44:15 And that's a really ugly diversive. 2:44:19 I knew this was coming. 2:44:23 Okay so I mean you know the people sitting on one side. 2:44:27 Seem to be a lot you know. 2:44:32 I like them more than the people sitting in maybe the mill. 2:44:36 But yeah I mean of course all that was great. 2:44:40 Everyone was going pretty well. 2:44:42 Like you know people are different. 2:44:44 Transactions are different. 2:44:45 Not everyone wants the same security model. 2:44:46 Look there's all this other stuff that's real. 2:44:48 That has real users. 2:44:50 And Peter Todd is also correct. 2:44:52 That in an ideal way from the perspective of R&D only. 2:44:57 Not from any other rational perspective. 2:45:00 But I'm just saying if you wanted to maximize R&D. 2:45:02 You would launch sidechains. 2:45:04 And roughly half of them would fail. 2:45:06 Because you'd want to figure out really quickly. 2:45:08 Like how far can I push the envelope. 2:45:10 So he's right that some would fail. 2:45:13 And now where he's wrong. 2:45:16 Is he says that politics will affect L1. 2:45:20 I mean it may. 2:45:22 But again my claim is that it will be much less. 2:45:24 Than we're already affected by L1. 2:45:27 In particular he's very wrong about this UASF thing. 2:45:30 The UASF again if you fight the miners with the UASF. 2:45:33 It is a hard fork. 2:45:34 Because you're breaking the heaviest chain rule. 2:45:36 So if it's users versus miners in a UASF. 2:45:40 Then it is a hard fork from the user's point of view. 2:45:43 The miners cast the tie-breaking vote for every soft fork. 2:45:47 And the soft fork needs only one of the two groups. 2:45:52 The UASF was a case where users made it clear. 2:45:58 That they only wanted to pay for blocks. 2:46:00 That had a certain. 2:46:02 That had this segment UASF. 2:46:04 That in that case that's a good thing. 2:46:06 The users are being empowered. 2:46:09 So again people could. 2:46:12 They don't need to do anything. 2:46:14 They don't need to care about the politics. 2:46:16 They may care about sympathy. 2:46:18 But yeah Drivechain is designed in many ways. 2:46:21 To evade the UASF style. 2:46:24 Neutralize it really. 2:46:25 Because it says you have three months of hash rate. 2:46:27 Already committed to something. 2:46:29 So they seem really committed. 2:46:33 And it's also saying like if you know. 2:46:35 There's no sense in which this is an accident. 2:46:38 There's no sense in which anyone's like saying. 2:46:40 They're confused about what's going on. 2:46:41 It's like a very slow thing. 2:46:43 So that they're fully. 2:46:49 It's like very transparent. 2:46:52 So the security model of Drivechain. 2:46:56 Is not based on UASF at all. 2:46:58 It's based on this economics of miner fees. 2:47:00 And the idea that miners want the coin to do well. 2:47:03 You can see that with a 20 Bitcoin giveaway thing. 2:47:08 That miners sometimes say. 2:47:10 Okay my short-term interests of this fee. 2:47:13 Do not outweigh the whole Bitcoin brand. 2:47:16 So maybe they would you know. 2:47:17 That's just proves to you that it's. 2:47:19 Theoretically it's possible. 2:47:21 Even if there's no fees. 2:47:23 And the UASF idea is. 2:47:28 It's you know. 2:47:29 It's designed to. 2:47:30 Drivechain is designed to resist that. 2:47:35 By having the long delay. 2:47:36 And saying that there's plenty of time. 2:47:39 Before it would even happen. 2:47:41 But there are these other events in Bitcoin's history. 2:47:43 The value overflow incident. 2:47:44 And this July 2015. 2:47:51 Like database lock thing that happened. 2:47:53 And so it's actually designed to shed. 2:47:58 The effects of the UASF. 2:48:03 The drama. 2:48:04 It's time to shed the drama as rapidly as possible. 2:48:06 But the thing is of course you could do UASF. 2:48:08 For any reason at any time. 2:48:10 People could just decide. 2:48:11 Like next Tuesday we're going to do UASF. 2:48:13 For this. 2:48:15 They could decide that they will do UASF. 2:48:17 To force the. 2:48:19 To force Drivechain to activate. 2:48:21 Or to force it not to activate. 2:48:22 Or to whatever. 2:48:24 Force the miners to steal. 2:48:25 Force the miners to be unable to steal. 2:48:27 Force nothing. 2:48:28 So the UASF is just the users getting what they want. 2:48:31 And we should be. 2:48:32 If they pull that off ever. 2:48:33 We should be happy about that. 2:48:35 They will be able. 2:48:36 Over in the long run. 2:48:37 They will always be able to pull that off. 2:48:39 And because they always get what they want. 2:48:41 Which is a good thing. 2:48:42 But I think it's clear. 2:48:43 The whole. 2:48:44 The idea of separable zones. 2:48:46 Is. 2:48:47 That's the whole. 2:48:49 That's the whole idea. 2:48:50 And the idea is that. 2:48:52 If miners mine on something. 2:48:54 See. 2:48:55 Well. 2:48:56 Why don't we let him finish his thought. 2:48:57 And then we'll reply to the whole thing. 2:48:59 But we'll see. 2:49:00 Yes. 2:49:03 The thing. 2:49:04 Whereas if you just want to go scale up. 2:49:06 If you just increase the block size. 2:49:08 I mean that everyone throws. 2:49:09 Relatively cheap computing hardware at the problem. 2:49:11 And. 2:49:12 That's probably a much better outcome. 2:49:13 To get say a 10x scaling. 2:49:15 Than having. 2:49:16 Ten more different Drivechains. 2:49:18 With different characteristics. 2:49:19 And a whole ton of complexity. 2:49:20 And a whole bunch of Twitter wars. 2:49:22 So we scale for. 2:49:23 So more people can put ordinals on Bitcoin. 2:49:26 I'd just say. 2:49:27 Between the two of them. 2:49:28 Throwing computing from. 2:49:29 You know. 2:49:30 Throwing computers at the problem. 2:49:31 Is just so much cheaper. 2:49:32 Like. 2:49:33 You know. 2:49:34 I don't think the 10x scaling increase. 2:49:35 Is something we should do anytime soon. 2:49:37 Hopefully we figure a way. 2:49:38 To never have to do it. 2:49:39 But. 2:49:40 It's certainly more desirable. 2:49:41 Than an outcome. 2:49:42 Where you've scaled. 2:49:43 By. 2:49:44 Doing a whole bunch of Drivechains. 2:49:45 Which are critically important. 2:49:46 To the world's commerce. 2:49:47 But they also fail. 2:49:48 So it's Peter Rage quitting. 2:49:49 Peter is moving to Big Cash. 2:49:50 The next year. 2:49:51 We'll find him. 2:49:52 We spotted him. 2:49:53 I was going to ask. 2:49:54 No. 2:49:55 But he's right. 2:49:56 In that like. 2:49:57 You can actually assess. 2:49:58 You know. 2:49:59 On chain scaling. 2:50:00 You can look at it. 2:50:01 And say. 2:50:02 You can even do studies. 2:50:03 And say how much it will. 2:50:04 Okay. 2:50:05 So first of all. 2:50:06 I misunderstood. 2:50:07 His original joke. 2:50:08 Was that I had already Rage Quit. 2:50:09 And that someone. 2:50:10 On this year's stage. 2:50:11 Would be next. 2:50:12 And he's saying. 2:50:13 It's Peter. 2:50:14 So I misunderstood. 2:50:15 His earlier joke. 2:50:16 So then. 2:50:17 Peter again. 2:50:18 So like. 2:50:19 The way that the. 2:50:20 The UASF. 2:50:21 It's not really. 2:50:22 Since it breaks. 2:50:23 The heaviest chain rule. 2:50:24 If you fight the miners. 2:50:25 It's really a hard fork. 2:50:26 So it's. 2:50:27 It's not UASF. 2:50:28 It's just a hard fork. 2:50:29 Which again. 2:50:30 Can be done at any time. 2:50:31 And that's also disruptive. 2:50:32 But the. 2:50:33 The way it's set up. 2:50:34 It has no downsides. 2:50:35 So it's either. 2:50:36 The. 2:50:37 You. 2:50:38 Either the users. 2:50:39 Ban the miners. 2:50:40 Theft transaction. 2:50:41 And the miners fold. 2:50:42 In which case. 2:50:43 Nothing happens. 2:50:44 The miners just lose. 2:50:45 And nothing happens. 2:50:46 There's no reorg. 2:50:47 There's no. 2:50:48 Anything. 2:50:49 Or. 2:50:50 They. 2:50:51 The miners. 2:50:52 Don't fold. 2:50:53 And they succeed. 2:50:54 With the theft. 2:50:55 And then everyone. 2:50:56 Who opted in. 2:50:57 Only. 2:50:58 They're on a. 2:50:59 A chain. 2:51:00 That has no. 2:51:01 Hash rate on it. 2:51:02 So it's. 2:51:03 Also the case. 2:51:04 That nothing happens. 2:51:05 They're really on a hard. 2:51:06 They basically hard fork. 2:51:07 Themselves. 2:51:08 Onto a chain. 2:51:09 That has no blocks. 2:51:10 So. 2:51:11 Either way. 2:51:12 Nothing happens. 2:51:13 At all. 2:51:14 So it's actually. 2:51:15 The idea of. 2:51:16 Calling it a UASF. 2:51:17 Similar to SegWit. 2:51:18 Where there's. 2:51:19 Twitter wars. 2:51:20 And there's. 2:51:21 Hats. 2:51:22 It's completely. 2:51:23 100%. 2:51:24 False. 2:51:25 It's a very. 2:51:26 Carefully. 2:51:27 Set up. 2:51:28 So that it does not. 2:51:29 Have any negative. 2:51:30 Impact. 2:51:31 And. 2:51:32 The. 2:51:33 I think. 2:51:34 Let me see. 2:51:35 If. 2:51:36 I'm going to try. 2:51:37 To explain this. 2:51:38 Here. 2:51:39 The. 2:51:40 You should. 2:51:41 Watch my. 2:51:42 Soft fork. 2:51:43 Panel. 2:51:44 With Jimmy. 2:51:45 Song. 2:51:46 And Jeremy. 2:51:47 Rubin. 2:51:48 The. 2:51:49 Soft fork. 2:51:50 Has. 2:51:51 Had. 2:51:52 Two different. 2:51:53 Definitions. 2:51:54 That sometimes overlap. 2:51:55 Sometimes are. 2:51:56 Irrelevant to each other. 2:51:57 And sometimes are. 2:51:58 Directly. 2:51:59 Contradict each other. 2:52:00 And those two. 2:52:01 Definitions are. 2:52:02 Tightening the rules. 2:52:03 Was loosening. 2:52:04 And then the other. 2:52:05 Definition is. 2:52:06 Does everyone. 2:52:07 Need to upgrade. 2:52:08 Or not. 2:52:09 So. 2:52:10 Those are the two. 2:52:11 When you. 2:52:12 You change that. 2:52:13 Does that. 2:52:14 Have people. 2:52:15 Not be able to see me. 2:52:16 The whole time. 2:52:17 Or. 2:52:18 I just wanted to. 2:52:19 Enlarge the image. 2:52:20 So people can. 2:52:21 Watch you. 2:52:22 While you explain. 2:52:23 The. 2:52:24 So this. 2:52:25 The idea. 2:52:26 Of it being USF. 2:52:27 The same. 2:52:28 Like I already thought of that. 2:52:29 Back in 2016. 2:52:30 And I designed it. 2:52:31 So that I would never have that. 2:52:32 The property of the drama. 2:52:33 Leaking one way. 2:52:34 It's like. 2:52:35 But even if it did. 2:52:36 I would consider that a success. 2:52:37 I would say. 2:52:38 Oh look. 2:52:39 The users of L1. 2:52:40 They felt sorry. 2:52:41 For the users of L2. 2:52:42 And they. 2:52:43 They protected. 2:52:44 Their privacy. 2:52:45 And they. 2:52:46 They protected. 2:52:47 Their privacy. 2:52:49 They protected them. 2:52:50 They chose to protect them. 2:52:51 Now if you're on L1. 2:52:52 And you want to ignore all of that. 2:52:53 Like I said. 2:52:54 You either ignore it. 2:52:55 And nothing happens. 2:52:56 Or it. 2:52:57 You either ignore it. 2:52:58 And something other happens. 2:52:59 Or it doesn't happen. 2:53:00 But either way. 2:53:01 You just end up. 2:53:02 This is the magic of the software. 2:53:03 Because you end up. 2:53:04 On the longest chain. 2:53:05 You end up with everyone. 2:53:06 So. 2:53:07 It really has no downsides. 2:53:08 At all. 2:53:09 I don't know. 2:53:10 If this is the easiest. 2:53:11 I don't know. 2:53:12 If I have a good way. 2:53:13 Of making this clear. 2:53:14 Or if I should write. 2:53:15 Some kind of. 2:53:16 Diagram. 2:53:17 Or something about this. 2:53:18 But. 2:53:19 It's designed. 2:53:20 Even in the case of the UASF. 2:53:21 Where you think. 2:53:22 It's like a human sympathy thing. 2:53:23 Where you think. 2:53:24 Of course it can travel. 2:53:25 Across chain. 2:53:26 In any direction. 2:53:27 But even in that case. 2:53:29 The users of L1. 2:53:31 Who do not want to pay attention. 2:53:33 Don't. 2:53:34 And it's exactly. 2:53:35 For that reason. 2:53:36 That Peter's. 2:53:37 Point is upside down. 2:53:38 It. 2:53:39 It does respect. 2:53:40 The attention of humans. 2:53:41 On L1. 2:53:42 And so. 2:53:43 If he's saying. 2:53:44 That it won't be so bad. 2:53:45 To have more hardware requirements. 2:53:46 For nodes. 2:53:47 Which again. 2:53:48 The node. 2:53:49 Hardware requirements are. 2:53:50 You know. 2:53:51 Microscopic. 2:53:52 Compared to the mining. 2:53:53 Hardware. 2:53:54 Which are. 2:53:55 Tens of millions of dollars. 2:53:56 The node. 2:53:57 Hardware requirements. 2:53:58 Are not that bad. 2:53:59 And of course. 2:54:00 As technology improves. 2:54:01 It does get easier. 2:54:02 Every year. 2:54:03 I wrote a post. 2:54:04 Called. 2:54:05 The thunder. 2:54:06 As a little joke. 2:54:07 And in an appendix. 2:54:08 I estimated. 2:54:09 How much it would cost. 2:54:10 To have. 2:54:11 One gigabyte nodes. 2:54:12 Which is of course. 2:54:13 Absurdly. 2:54:14 You mean. 2:54:15 One gigabyte blocks. 2:54:16 Not nodes. 2:54:17 One gigabyte. 2:54:18 One gigabyte blocks. 2:54:19 Right. 2:54:20 Which is absurd. 2:54:21 And we should never do. 2:54:22 But I just thought. 2:54:23 What would that cost? 2:54:24 On a sidechain. 2:54:25 You can have UTXO commitments. 2:54:26 And throw out. 2:54:27 State. 2:54:28 Like. 2:54:29 As nine months go by. 2:54:30 You can start throwing away stuff. 2:54:31 You know. 2:54:32 Like. 2:54:33 So. 2:54:34 In that case. 2:54:35 You kind of get all the benefits. 2:54:36 Of ZK. 2:54:37 Approves. 2:54:38 Only more transparent. 2:54:39 So. 2:54:40 So. 2:54:41 It's actually. 2:54:42 Nice. 2:54:43 So. 2:54:44 So what. 2:54:45 Is. 2:54:46 Like. 2:54:47 2000 dollars. 2:54:48 A promise. 2:54:49 And like. 2:54:50 400 hours. 2:54:51 A month or something. 2:54:52 So. 2:54:53 And that was. 2:54:54 A few years ago. 2:54:55 So. 2:54:56 So just like. 2:54:56 But anyway. Yeah. The U.S.S. Thing. It's the opposite of what he says. It's designed so that the drama does not travel from L2 to L1. There is no. There is no such thing as a U.S.F. In this. Of this form. It's a hard fork. Just like every U.S.F. Is actually a hard fork. Because breaking the longest chain rule is always a hard fork. The Drivechain is designed to measure the miners opinion. Very accurately. 2:55:23 So. 2:55:25 It's designed. 2:55:27 Three months in advance. 2:55:29 And. 2:55:31 It is also designed. 2:55:33 To. 2:55:35 Deter. 2:55:37 It's designed to rely on. 2:55:39 Miners maximizing their own. 2:55:41 Net worth. 2:55:43 Which is the security model. 2:55:45 So it's not. 2:55:47 It is not. 2:55:49 It doesn't affect any of the people. 2:55:51 Paying attention. 2:55:53 But I think he's at least. 2:55:55 Has the criterion right. 2:55:57 That we should care only if it affects other people on L1. 2:55:59 But yeah. 2:56:01 I would like to stress again that this is. 2:56:03 When he's saying this. 2:56:05 This is before he has written his tweet. 2:56:07 Saying that he hasn't actually looked into the idea yet. 2:56:09 So. 2:56:11 And you can kind of see that. 2:56:13 In that he doesn't really understand. 2:56:15 He thinks it's like about voting. 2:56:17 But since they all take three months. 2:56:19 And each of them has to be a dispute. 2:56:21 The software will do it all automatically. 2:56:23 If they match. 2:56:25 So it's only. 2:56:27 It has to be 200 disputes. 2:56:29 And then you have three months. 2:56:31 So you actually have a long time. 2:56:33 It's certainly interesting. 2:56:35 To hear you go for that thought process. 2:56:37 In real time. 2:56:39 Because I realize that you're explaining. 2:56:41 A very simple concept. 2:56:43 But it took you like five minutes. 2:56:45 But basically. 2:56:47 I think what they're referring to. 2:56:49 Is the fact that miners. 2:56:51 Do they vote? 2:56:53 Is this a correct term? 2:56:55 They vote. 2:56:57 And they need 75% of the hash rate. 2:56:59 To get deployed. 2:57:01 Each block. 2:57:03 Can move the score up. 2:57:05 So they're really more like confirmations. 2:57:07 But I think of them as upvotes. 2:57:09 I mean I just think of it as like a reddit thing. 2:57:11 When upvotes. 2:57:13 It sucked. 2:57:15 In 2015 I was making this. 2:57:17 Okay. 2:57:19 But I think 25% is the right. 2:57:21 Proportion that I'm describing. 2:57:23 If 25% are against. 2:57:25 They can veto. 2:57:27 It's like you downvote. 2:57:29 So you need to get half. 2:57:31 You need to get halfway to 26,000. 2:57:33 You need to get to 13,000. 2:57:35 So you can upvote and downvote. 2:57:37 So if you have 25% who are downvoting. 2:57:39 You need 75% upvoting. 2:57:41 To just barely make it in time. 2:57:43 Okay. 2:57:45 So 25% of the hash rate. 2:57:47 Can unlock the funds. 2:57:49 That some miners. 2:57:51 Don't want to release from a Drivechain. 2:57:53 Is that correct? 2:57:55 If they're 25% then they are blocking it. 2:57:57 They're trying to just stall. 2:57:59 They're like a filibustering. 2:58:01 Or vetoing or something. 2:58:03 So basically if someone. 2:58:05 Let's say that I want to release. 2:58:07 The Vlad scammy sidechain. 2:58:09 I want to do hex on a sidechain. 2:58:11 And scam the entire planet. 2:58:13 25% of miners. 2:58:15 Can decide to not. 2:58:17 Let that happen. 2:58:19 To not let the Drivechain get launched. 2:58:21 Is that correct? 2:58:23 The activation is slightly different. 2:58:25 But let's just assume that. 2:58:27 We'll sweep that detail away for the moment. 2:58:29 We'll just say there's deposits and withdrawals. 2:58:31 The coin, the BTC. 2:58:33 Will travel slowly from sidechain. 2:58:35 To layer one mainchain. 2:58:37 But. 2:58:39 The sidechain. 2:58:41 Is going to procedurally generate. 2:58:43 It generates exactly what this hash should be. 2:58:45 And then the miners job. 2:58:47 Is to just copy that over. 2:58:49 Their job is never to just make up some new thing. 2:58:51 Which is what they would have to do. 2:58:53 It make up some new hash. 2:58:55 That pays someone else. 2:58:57 And you can see why. 2:58:59 That would be very difficult. 2:59:01 Because they would have to then decide. 2:59:03 How they came up with that. 2:59:05 Instead of doing it all automatically. 2:59:07 That's why it's always sort of indefensible. 2:59:09 To do anything other than that. 2:59:11 Because it's like. 2:59:13 Where did that come from? 2:59:15 Okay. 2:59:17 While you sip some water. 2:59:19 I got to play another ad. 2:59:21 Because I forgot about this. 2:59:23 I'm supposed to play ads. 2:59:25 How am I going to make a donation. 2:59:27 If you're listening to this. 2:59:29 If they drop me or whatever. 2:59:31 Anyway I'm going to play this ad. 2:59:33 It's going to be 1426. 2:59:35 In the video. 2:59:37 So that's almost half way into it. 3:00:03 Thanks to NFC. 3:00:05 You can use the SadoDyme card with your smart phone. 3:00:07 Creating a new pair of bitcoin keys. 3:00:09 Takes just two swipes. 3:00:11 Check your balance in real time. 3:00:13 Create multiple key pairs. 3:00:15 Whenever you want. 3:00:17 You can reveal your bitcoin wallet's private key. 3:00:19 With just a single click. 3:00:21 The simple uncluttered interface. 3:00:23 Let's you quickly see if a key pair has been unsealed. 3:00:25 Finally the cold storage you've been looking for. 3:00:27 Available now on SadoDyme.io 3:00:33 Random prediction Paul. 3:00:35 I think all of this debate. 3:00:37 All this discussion about. 3:00:39 Scaling bitcoin is going to end up. 3:00:41 Basically increasing the block size. 3:00:43 I think that's going to be the compromise. 3:00:45 That everyone makes. 3:00:47 I'm not sure who's going to be happy with this. 3:00:49 But it seems like. 3:00:51 Nobody wants to inflate the 21 million supply. 3:00:53 It seems like. 3:00:55 People don't want to wrap their heads around. 3:00:57 Drivechains. 3:00:59 They think they're too complicated. 3:01:01 Just turn one into two. 3:01:03 Or four or whatever. 3:01:05 And move on. 3:01:07 I mean you might be right about that. 3:01:09 I don't know. 3:01:11 That would be funny. 3:01:13 That would be very funny. 3:01:15 If people pivoted from. 3:01:17 Like. 3:01:19 They take the Peter Todd view. 3:01:21 And they say. 3:01:23 It's going to be. 3:01:25 Like something we understand. 3:01:27 Bigger blocks. 3:01:29 It's the same thing with speeds. 3:01:31 And the hard drive costs are there. 3:01:33 And that would be consistent. 3:01:35 With the whole like. 3:01:37 People maintaining their control over. 3:01:39 There's like a conspiracy theory about. 3:01:41 It's about who controls the code. 3:01:43 So I guess. 3:01:45 That would be kind of consistent with that. 3:01:47 Conspiracy theory. 3:01:49 Yep. 3:01:51 I mean. 3:01:53 We've got a lot of video. 3:01:55 We've got to get through the whole video. 3:01:57 The next on the name. 3:01:59 I've got John Carvalho. 3:02:01 More importantly. 3:02:03 Look at it and say. 3:02:05 You can even do studies. 3:02:07 And say how much it will cost. 3:02:09 The average person per year. 3:02:11 You can actually assess it. 3:02:13 You can't do that with Drivechains. 3:02:15 And more importantly. 3:02:17 We need to like have a better understanding. 3:02:19 Of what we mean when we say scaling. 3:02:21 Like there's scaling. 3:02:23 Like just making number go up. 3:02:25 You know what I mean? 3:02:27 Block chains don't scale in themselves. 3:02:29 The end user needs to scale in the end. 3:02:31 In order to do network scaling. 3:02:33 You need to increase the capacity of the network. 3:02:35 So it's not actually a form of scaling. 3:02:37 If you aren't increasing the capacity for bitcoin. 3:02:39 Lightning network. 3:02:41 Kind of is like a nice little hack. 3:02:43 Because it's like an alternative network. 3:02:45 But it still uses bitcoin transactions. 3:02:47 So there is a little bit of a compromise. 3:02:49 And say that. 3:02:51 It affects the incentive structure of miners. 3:02:53 For example. 3:02:55 But it's still bitcoin transactions. 3:02:57 And so it still scales transactions. 3:02:59 Let me try to address. 3:03:01 Serge's point about maximalism and tension. 3:03:03 I think it's a very popular opinion. 3:03:05 That maximalists are asking. 3:03:07 To put every use cases on bitcoin. 3:03:09 And so the tensions. 3:03:11 The tensions seems to emerge. 3:03:13 Because wait. 3:03:15 You don't like shit coins. 3:03:17 But when we try to do shit coins on bitcoin. 3:03:19 You get defensive. 3:03:21 You have to pick one. 3:03:23 You cannot say. 3:03:25 Everything on bitcoin. 3:03:27 But not this on bitcoin. 3:03:29 But I think one fundamental misunderstanding. 3:03:31 Is that the original maximalist position. 3:03:33 Was not really. 3:03:35 This should all go on bitcoin. 3:03:37 Or everything should go on bitcoin. 3:03:39 It was originally. 3:03:41 Either this use case that you are proposing. 3:03:43 Doesn't even make sense. 3:03:45 So it's not necessary that I want NFT on bitcoin. 3:03:47 Maybe I just think they are stupid. 3:03:49 Or this thing is great. 3:03:51 It's perfect. 3:03:53 It's beautiful. 3:03:55 But it should just run on a database. 3:03:57 So I remember one of the things I used to shield in 2017. 3:03:59 Was a great website. 3:04:01 It's still around. 3:04:03 It's myblockchain.xyz. 3:04:05 And it's a website where you can download software. 3:04:07 Your software is a blockchain. 3:04:09 It's actually a fork of MySQL. 3:04:11 But the tables are renamed into blocks. 3:04:13 And records are renamed into transactions. 3:04:15 And now you can run a blockchain. 3:04:17 So sometimes when people say. 3:04:19 I want to do this. 3:04:21 Which doesn't require this decentralization. 3:04:23 Or security. 3:04:25 My answer is usually not. 3:04:27 Do it on bitcoin. 3:04:29 But it's usually. 3:04:31 That's okay. 3:04:33 Let's just open a spreadsheet. 3:04:35 Unless you have a specific reason not to do that. 3:04:37 For example. 3:04:39 Do you want to do something legal. 3:04:41 Or partially or likely legal. 3:04:43 As somebody would say. 3:04:45 I don't know. 3:04:47 Frogs. 3:04:49 Autographers of artists. 3:04:51 Just open up a spreadsheet. 3:04:53 We don't want to change bitcoin. 3:04:55 Because we think your use case. 3:04:57 Not yours specifically. 3:04:59 Is not even worth the effort. 3:05:01 To decentralize it. 3:05:03 Because it's centralized anyway. 3:05:05 Like ICO projects. 3:05:07 Where there is a marketing team. 3:05:09 A website with faces. 3:05:11 Just open MySQL. 3:05:13 And use client side validation techniques. 3:05:15 Which scale indefinitely. 3:05:17 And let you still have your database. 3:05:19 So basically. 3:05:21 It's not like. 3:05:23 Go. 3:05:25 Actually let's let Sergey. 3:05:27 Let's see what Sergey has to say. 3:05:29 That's the case. 3:05:31 For every other cryptocurrency. 3:05:33 There are things that are. 3:05:35 Reasonably decentralized. 3:05:37 Reasonably secure. 3:05:39 Things like litecoin for example. 3:05:41 Where live and thrive. 3:05:43 Works similarly like bitcoin. 3:05:45 But makes some different trade-offs. 3:05:47 And it seems that. 3:05:49 That suits certain people. 3:05:51 And it's not declining or dying off. 3:05:53 Or anything. 3:05:55 It's just doing it's own thing. 3:05:57 And there are projects. 3:05:59 That matter where. 3:06:01 You don't need a blockchain for that. 3:06:03 The answer does not really necessarily apply. 3:06:05 Even litecoin. 3:06:07 Assume that you have bitcoin. 3:06:09 As a store of value. 3:06:11 Because. 3:06:13 Yeah litecoin wasn't great. 3:06:15 I think the smarter thing would be. 3:06:17 To say Zcash for privacy. 3:06:19 Or you just say the scalability thing. 3:06:21 Which links all the. 3:06:23 The long. 3:06:25 All the wrongness of all the different answers. 3:06:27 So like John Carvalho was saying. 3:06:29 Well we don't want. 3:06:31 He said the USF thing. 3:06:33 Because he thinks that it's USF. 3:06:35 But again as I've already explained. 3:06:37 He's saying that. 3:06:39 Lightning can scale. 3:06:41 Bitcoin. 3:06:43 Because it uses bitcoin transactions. 3:06:45 The reality though. 3:06:47 Is that lightning is probably not going to scale anything. 3:06:49 Because it's probably just going to be abandoned. 3:06:51 Probably. 3:06:53 I don't know. 3:06:55 In five years we'll see. 3:06:57 I'm not sure. 3:06:59 But at this rate I don't think it will. 3:07:01 The technical elite jumped ship last year. 3:07:03 Partially on John's podcast. 3:07:05 He was talking about the lightning limitations. 3:07:07 Synonym spaces. 3:07:09 And just play it if you want. 3:07:11 If you think that lightning has a bright future. 3:07:13 Just press play. 3:07:15 And then I think we had. 3:07:17 I think Ark was saying. 3:07:19 About the fundamental limitations. 3:07:21 He mentioned it. 3:07:23 I think. 3:07:25 Yeah. 3:07:27 And then we have this idea. 3:07:29 About Giacomo saying. 3:07:31 That he is infallible. 3:07:33 When it comes to determining. 3:07:35 If the end user's use case. 3:07:37 Is legit or not. 3:07:39 And so there's no toleration. 3:07:41 Of any kind of creativity. 3:07:43 Or novelty. 3:07:45 But even. 3:07:47 If there was no novelty. 3:07:49 Still the scaling idea. 3:07:51 Is key. 3:07:53 It is. 3:07:55 When John Carvalho says. 3:07:57 It doesn't scale. 3:07:59 Bitcoin. 3:08:01 What I mean by that. 3:08:03 Is that. 3:08:05 Every single person. 3:08:07 On the planet earth. 3:08:09 A week after activating BIP300. 3:08:11 Could all obtain. 3:08:13 Bitcoin in a wallet. 3:08:15 That has. 3:08:17 The money is controlled by keys. 3:08:19 And where they sign transactions. 3:08:21 And where they could. 3:08:23 Each of them could settle to L1. 3:08:25 They can't all settle at once. 3:08:27 But each of them could. 3:08:29 If everyone else doesn't want to. 3:08:31 At that particular moment. 3:08:33 Or they could join forces. 3:08:35 With someone who is. 3:08:37 And move interoperably among these. 3:08:39 More people could use. 3:08:41 Bitcoin in that way. 3:08:43 Than could use the lightning network. 3:08:45 Because lightning network. 3:08:47 Does nothing to stop onboarding. 3:08:49 So Giacomo misses. 3:08:51 The big use cases. 3:08:53 Of just scaling Bitcoin. 3:08:55 And Zcash privacy. 3:08:57 There's a whole argument to be made. 3:08:59 About what will human creativity invent. 3:09:01 When it's free of these gatekeepers. 3:09:03 But I think that was. 3:09:05 Disappointing. 3:09:07 Him saying that. 3:09:09 That's what I used to believe. 3:09:11 Back in 2015, 2016. 3:09:13 That the use case. 3:09:15 No one will ever invent. 3:09:17 A good use case. 3:09:19 And that it will be. 3:09:21 It will all just be databases. 3:09:23 Or just people who are. 3:09:25 Hopelessly deluded. 3:09:27 But I don't believe. 3:09:29 That at all anymore. 3:09:31 I think that. 3:09:33 In fact the fact that we. 3:09:35 Bet everything on lightning. 3:09:37 Proves how foolish it was. 3:09:39 For us to presume. 3:09:41 That we know anything. 3:09:43 About what the end user will enjoy. 3:09:45 So I think that. 3:09:47 Also he. 3:09:49 Is in direct conflict with. 3:09:51 For example Bruce Fenton. 3:09:53 I mentioned the ICOs. 3:09:55 And like the marketing team. 3:09:57 Bruce Fenton. 3:09:59 Who has enormous amount of experience. 3:10:01 In this area. 3:10:03 He says that even. 3:10:05 That there would be of enormous value. 3:10:07 Even if the company. 3:10:09 Is itself centralized. 3:10:11 The process for issuing. 3:10:13 The corporation's shares. 3:10:15 And transferring them. 3:10:17 He says is terrible. 3:10:19 And I agree with him. 3:10:21 It would be much improved. 3:10:23 If there was just a way to transfer. 3:10:25 These bearer instruments around. 3:10:27 They would still be. 3:10:29 The redemption of them would still be centralized. 3:10:31 But that's again. 3:10:33 Something like tether is an example of that. 3:10:35 Where tether is centralized to redemption. 3:10:37 But it really doesn't seem to matter. 3:10:39 For most people. 3:10:41 Most people don't need to redeem. 3:10:43 They still get an enormous amount of value. 3:10:45 From the service. 3:10:47 People love USDT. 3:10:49 They really like it a lot. 3:10:51 So I don't know. 3:10:53 Like. 3:10:55 But the whole. 3:10:57 The premise is that. 3:10:59 Giacomo knows better than the inventor. 3:11:01 Of something. 3:11:03 And it will always be true. 3:11:05 What was true. 3:11:07 What people thought was true. 3:11:09 Just because IBM. 3:11:11 Tried to do blockchain. 3:11:13 Whatever healthcare on the blockchain. 3:11:15 It was a joke in 2016. 3:11:17 And nothing. 3:11:19 Nothing useful will ever be invented. 3:11:21 And there won't be any need to tweak. 3:11:23 Or change anything. 3:11:25 In response to new technology. 3:11:27 New opportunities. 3:11:29 New innovation. 3:11:31 New problems. 3:11:33 New culture. 3:11:35 New use case. 3:11:37 So he's saying. 3:11:39 We're going to bet everything. 3:11:41 That no one will invent something cool. 3:11:43 Ever again. 3:11:45 I don't know Vlad. 3:11:47 What do you think? 3:11:49 I don't think it matters what I think. 3:11:51 This is all about you watching this. 3:11:53 And reacting. 3:11:55 All right. 3:11:57 Let's keep going. 3:11:59 So having Litecoin as a store of value. 3:12:01 I mean everybody is free. 3:12:03 But come on. 3:12:05 So you have Bitcoin as a store of value. 3:12:07 Now you want to transact very free. 3:12:09 And very cheap. 3:12:11 So what you need to do. 3:12:13 Is to change it to Litecoin. 3:12:15 To send it to your friend. 3:12:17 Or to the merchant. 3:12:19 That will have to send it back to an exchange. 3:12:21 To send it on chain. 3:12:23 To Bitcoin. 3:12:25 So either you go off chain. 3:12:27 Or maybe use cash. 3:12:29 Something that doesn't even create. 3:12:31 An old new blockchain. 3:12:33 With a new form of money. 3:12:35 With a slippage in price. 3:12:37 Between in and out. 3:12:39 It's like I want to do a swap. 3:12:41 Which is not very private. 3:12:43 To some kind of market. 3:12:45 That could be even decentralized. 3:12:47 But the order book will be public. 3:12:49 Which will be a bottleneck in liquidity. 3:12:51 So also in a non-limit set. 3:12:53 And then my merchant eventually. 3:12:55 If it doesn't want to lose money. 3:12:57 Will convert back to Bitcoin. 3:12:59 So maybe there is value in batching things. 3:13:01 But most of these narratives. 3:13:03 They are not fighted off. 3:13:05 Like you should do that on Bitcoin. 3:13:07 Most of the time it's. 3:13:09 Sure in your opinion. 3:13:11 But it's a big assumption. 3:13:13 What you describe. 3:13:15 There's plenty of people. 3:13:17 Who live their life within the monero ecosystem. 3:13:19 Or in the Litecoin ecosystem. 3:13:21 And don't. 3:13:23 And there are services that serve them. 3:13:25 So there are definitely. 3:13:27 Indisputably economies. 3:13:29 They should be free. 3:13:31 There are people that on TikTok. 3:13:33 They pay girls to pretend to be. 3:13:35 NPC video game characters. 3:13:37 They should be free to do that. 3:13:39 I don't want necessarily. 3:13:41 My system to enable them to do that. 3:13:43 And I can't criticize. 3:13:45 I can say this stupid. 3:13:47 But I will never initiate violence against them. 3:13:49 So people should coin and learn. 3:13:51 Anyway monero is an interesting thing. 3:13:53 Where it does have a very. 3:13:55 Interesting advantage over Bitcoin. 3:13:57 For things that are maybe less than legal. 3:13:59 Which is it's very difficult to. 3:14:01 Use monero in such a way. 3:14:03 That your privacy is terrible. 3:14:05 Monero is much higher than Bitcoin. 3:14:07 Good reports. 3:14:09 Yeah just due to how the software happens to work. 3:14:11 Now obviously you could go design a new. 3:14:13 Bitcoin payment standard. 3:14:15 Where that was true too. 3:14:17 And you could imagine like you know. 3:14:19 Lightning triple secure. 3:14:21 And that's the only thing like. 3:14:23 Dark markets would support. 3:14:25 But that's just not how the. 3:14:27 Ecosystems happen. 3:14:29 So that's monero's niche. 3:14:31 I think censorship resistance. 3:14:33 We want the developers. 3:14:35 We want the users. 3:14:37 We want Bitcoin to be the backbone. 3:14:39 Of the world's economy in the future. 3:14:41 And just because we here. 3:14:43 Use Bitcoin in a certain way. 3:14:45 It doesn't mean that the rest of the world. 3:14:47 And the future users of Bitcoin. 3:14:49 Won't want to use it in a different way. 3:14:51 Like how do we make that possible. 3:14:53 Like what proposals exist out there. 3:14:55 To make that possible. 3:14:57 Without just suggesting. 3:14:59 That they use a custodial service. 3:15:01 I suppose the issue is really. 3:15:03 Mining decentralization. 3:15:05 Like they're offloading the idea. 3:15:07 Of running all these separate federations. 3:15:09 Which can be very troublesome. 3:15:11 Federations are hard to run. 3:15:13 Just ask anyone who runs a federation. 3:15:15 For any popular Bitcoin sidechain. 3:15:17 You would offload that onto miners. 3:15:19 But I'm not saying it's a particularly. 3:15:21 Good idea to do that. 3:15:23 Because you're empowering miners. 3:15:25 But I'm just saying that. 3:15:27 I can understand why it's a proposal. 3:15:29 But the thing with Drivechains. 3:15:31 Mining centralization. 3:15:33 Is that it's not so much like. 3:15:35 Oh Drivechains would be okay. 3:15:37 If we could get miners. 3:15:39 Okay I mean I just wanted to. 3:15:41 Before whatever this is happens. 3:15:43 All of that was pretty good. 3:15:45 Wasn't it? 3:15:47 A lot of people. 3:15:49 The Monero example is much better. 3:15:51 Peter Todd admitted that it was a niche. 3:15:53 No one is even giving. 3:15:55 John the microphone. 3:15:57 So he's not saying anything. 3:15:59 Which is great. 3:16:01 And yeah. 3:16:03 Privacy is important to people. 3:16:05 Monero undisputably is real. 3:16:07 And there are services for that. 3:16:09 And yeah. 3:16:11 The idea is you shouldn't compare this. 3:16:13 To L1 block space. 3:16:15 You should say what can we do. 3:16:17 What can we give everyone in the world. 3:16:19 That they would actually like. 3:16:21 You know. 3:16:23 That would actually work for them. 3:16:25 People. 3:16:27 People do seem to be getting it. 3:16:29 I think the idea. 3:16:31 You were there. 3:16:33 Did you see this live? 3:16:35 No unfortunately. 3:16:37 I was outside. 3:16:39 I was promoting my magazine. 3:16:41 But I watched this on live stream. 3:16:43 Okay can you tell me like. 3:16:45 Did as many people attend this year. 3:16:47 As last year? 3:16:49 No it was a smaller event. 3:16:51 And it was a different. 3:16:53 Was it a different venue? 3:16:55 No it was the same venue. 3:16:57 And it felt more like a family reunion. 3:16:59 As opposed to a conference. 3:17:01 Yeah you know. 3:17:03 The Miami conference was also smaller. 3:17:05 So that I think the whole space is shrinking. 3:17:07 Because it was the post COVID high. 3:17:09 Of just the euphoria. 3:17:11 Of like breaking free of COVID. 3:17:13 No it's more than that. 3:17:15 It was the first year. 3:17:17 During the bull market. 3:17:19 And then the year after the bull market. 3:17:21 And now it's two years. 3:17:23 Into the bear market. 3:17:25 And people are tired. 3:17:27 And they just want the number to go up. 3:17:29 For some reason. 3:17:31 And they don't want to spend too much. 3:17:33 I did notice that. 3:17:35 The market dynamics are different right now. 3:17:37 And everyone complains. 3:17:39 That nobody is spending their bitcoin. 3:17:41 And all businesses are downsizing. 3:17:43 As far as I know. 3:17:45 Bitcoin magazine fired. 3:17:47 Half of their staff. 3:17:49 Last month. 3:17:51 Yeah Coindesk also. 3:17:53 It's like this. 3:17:55 I also noticed on my website. 3:17:57 That the number of searches. 3:17:59 I mean 80% of my traffic. 3:18:01 On bitcointakeover.com. 3:18:03 Is driven by search engines. 3:18:05 And I noticed that. 3:18:07 The amount of clicks is decreasing. 3:18:09 I went from. 3:18:11 I think during the bull market. 3:18:13 I had around 500 views a day. 3:18:15 On articles. 3:18:17 To less than 100. 3:18:21 It's like that. 3:18:23 Also the podcast is not doing so great. 3:18:25 But if you're listening to this. 3:18:27 I'm really grateful. 3:18:29 Me too. 3:18:31 This is a good one. 3:18:33 There's so many bad bitcoin podcasts. 3:18:35 That are just unlistenable. 3:18:37 But you know. 3:18:39 They're making more money than me. 3:18:41 Yeah. 3:18:43 I just said. 3:18:45 They're really really generic. 3:18:47 And predictable. 3:18:49 That would be really well. 3:18:51 It's kind of depressing. 3:18:53 When you think about it. 3:18:55 And I don't want to change the subject. 3:18:57 To be this about myself. 3:18:59 But if I just did a podcast. 3:19:01 Where I just said. 3:19:03 Bitcoin is going to 1 million dollars. 3:19:05 And talk about this every day. 3:19:07 And say it's invincible. 3:19:09 It's unstoppable. 3:19:11 It's a rock. 3:19:13 You know. 3:19:15 Satoshi was an alien. 3:19:17 He was a time traveler. 3:19:19 He was a genius. 3:19:21 He was this and that. 3:19:23 I could make so much money. 3:19:25 If I did that. 3:19:27 Also if I had a British accent. 3:19:29 But I don't. 3:19:31 I choose to follow this path. 3:19:33 And it's hard. 3:19:35 It will pay off Vlad. 3:19:37 Don't worry. 3:19:39 It's going to pay off. 3:19:41 What do you look at? 3:19:43 Never mind. 3:19:45 Let's just continue watching. 3:19:47 I was just curious. 3:19:49 I would have liked to know. 3:19:51 Is the audience paying attention? 3:19:53 What is the audience paying attention? Do they laugh at anything? Are they really interested? 3:19:57 Because this kicked off this panel. And then there was one throwaway joke about ordinals. And then 3:20:01 everyone felt compelled to talk about this idea. Now it does seem like they got it out of their 3:20:07 system. They're a little. They're whinging and complaining. And they're conventioning. 3:20:13 And now they're kind of like. Okay. Wait a minute. I'm the criterion of what do we give 3:20:19 the people who want ring signatures? What do we give the people who want something to use tomorrow? 3:20:27 Or who are willing to change the security trade-off? What do we give the people? The 3:20:32 Ethereum people? They're like we've got nothing. Paul's idea is the only idea. So I don't. They're 3:20:38 not quite saying that. But they're sort of. People sort of get it a little bit. 3:20:43 But now we're going to hear Peter dump cold water over everyone. Or we're going to try, I suppose. 3:20:51 Maybe. Also, before I press play, I just want to make this remark. Last year you were there on this 3:20:59 exact panel about unpopular opinions. But they did not talk about Drivechains as much as they 3:21:04 did when you were not there. Well, I remember that I changed it to Drivechain at some point. 3:21:11 We talked about it the whole time. And then I said, how much time do we have? 3:21:15 And then I said, just keep going. The whole audience was like, keep going. 3:21:19 So then we did talk about it for a little bit. I don't know. Did you actually time it out? I would 3:21:24 be interested to know how far we got it on last year. Maybe it was like 25 minutes. I don't know. 3:21:29 No, it was longer. But the whole panel was very long last year. But I don't know how much. There 3:21:36 was like a Drivechain section. So I don't know if we compared them. I honestly don't know if we 3:21:43 made it to half an hour. This seems like it was more. You're right. Yes. Anyway, let's push on. 3:21:51 Mining decentralized is that having things like Drivechains makes mining inherently 3:21:57 more centralized because it makes it much more complex. And once you start getting these failure 3:22:01 modes, you know, you cannot be a P2 pool miner in a Drivechains world so easily. That's your 3:22:08 real issue. But I also kind of want to say, like, you know, as much as you go talk about, well, 3:22:13 you know, Lightning can't support this, Lightning can't support that. I mean, we're probably, 3:22:16 what, ten years away from Lightning even beginning to go and hit these limits in terms of actual 3:22:22 adoption? Ten years is a long time. I mean, for all I know, in five years we're going to invent 3:22:27 Lightning 2.0 and we'll fix all these problems. I don't know, man. I mean, like 2008 happened in 3:22:31 the blink of an eye and it could happen again. So I don't want to be a scaremonger. And then 3:22:35 also for all the unbanked regions of the world which want access to decent and stable money, 3:22:39 like, I mean, you can laugh at that. But I mean, I think it's important that they have access to 3:22:43 it. And how do we give them access to it? How do we give them access to it now? I just don't see 3:22:49 Bitcoin getting to that level of growth that quickly. I think it would be much better waiting. 3:22:54 So if we're talking about mining, like, maybe, you know, the fact that these Drivechains exist 3:23:00 and we're reliant upon those miners to not collude and then steal our money, maybe that is the thing 3:23:05 which then, like, adds, puts more energy into projects like StramV2. All right, guys, we ate 3:23:10 up 23 minutes on Drivechains. Maybe we can try one more. Can I make a quick summary? Just that, 3:23:16 like, to summarize, you said we want this. There's no we. Like, the problem is that we all want 3:23:21 different things, and that will never stop being true. And so you're only ever can expect the 3:23:25 lowest common denominator out of Bitcoin. I'm just talking about the conflicting 3:23:30 souls inside my brain. And I think, like, we need to start talking and communicating more clearly 3:23:37 about the gold conflicts that we have. Because even within this room, we have very different 3:23:42 goals for Bitcoin that create these tensions. And oftentimes, I see people just talking past 3:23:50 each other, because this guy has this goal, and this guy has that goal in their attention, 3:23:54 and then they argue. Whereas in reality, it's like, yeah, this is my goal. This is my goal. 3:23:59 Okay, we could also be civil and find some kind of common ground, because that's the only thing 3:24:04 that's going to end up happening anyway. This is the difference between rhetoric and dialectic, 3:24:08 like, often within that kind of maximus ideology. Rhetoric is very important, because it is something, 3:24:12 it's a security mechanism for Bitcoin. But we do not, the dialectic is good that we have, 3:24:19 different conflicting ideas, which then find synthesis, and that's how you progress. 3:24:22 And if you just use rhetoric, then you don't progress. So there's a balance to be had where, 3:24:26 yes, absolutely. I first heard the word drive-chainer a couple of days ago, or yesterday 3:24:32 on Twitter. And I was like, am I a drive-chainer? Because I don't think it's an altogether terrible 3:24:37 idea, or parts of it aren't a terrible idea. So let me go back to something you said earlier, 3:24:43 which is probably also a source of contention that we can all talk about. I think you said, 3:24:49 increasing the block size on Bitcoin would be a better idea than Drivechains. 3:24:53 Did I hear you correctly? Increasing the block size is a better idea than Drivechains for the 3:24:58 purpose of increasing the block size. Okay, so does that take us into block size wars 2.0? 3:25:08 There is a version of Drivechains advocacy that says, we're going to do this, go scale Bitcoin. 3:25:15 And what that advocacy really is, is we're going to do this so we can increase the block size 3:25:20 without increasing the block size. And that way of increasing the block size, allowing more 3:25:24 transactions per second, it's far more technically complex, and in particular, much more politically 3:25:30 complex than just increasing the block size. In a way, Peter's joke is a little bit like 3:25:36 post-hoc move. The Blockstream version of miner-based SPV, fraud-proof-based sidechain, 3:25:43 was so complex, and it trusted miners anyway. So Paul said, let's just do something more obvious, 3:25:49 which does the same thing, trusting miners. And Peter says, okay, that will create basically a 3:25:53 block size increase. At this point, you could basically just increase the blocks. So I think 3:25:58 that it was Adam maybe today in another panel saying that eventually, in some years, the long 3:26:06 tail, social long tail of the block size war will basically begin to evaporate, and we will be able 3:26:12 maybe to discuss block size limit again a little bit. For example, most of the people 3:26:19 disagree with the GigaMech idiocy of the block. 3:26:26 Okay, now we're touching on very advanced and nuanced concepts, which is very good. 3:26:30 And in fact, so many went that I had to take some notes. But I think, okay, so Peter Todd 3:26:35 seriously saying that we won't have to worry about this for 10 years because we'll grow that slowly, 3:26:39 like that, I think is, I don't agree with that at all. I think that is, 3:26:46 that's a really weird thing to presume. I think that Bitcoin has grown so quickly. 3:26:54 And I agree 2008 could happen at any moment. I honestly think, you know, the long run fiscal 3:26:59 situation of the United States government is also like, you know, we don't know where the line is, 3:27:05 but at some point, it will be will be hit. And that would be a great day for Bitcoin. 3:27:13 I also think it's like, until we show people that we actually could scale to 8 billion people in 3:27:19 some form, no one will take it seriously, because they'll just think like, well, that 3:27:25 that project will grow to its maximum size, and then it will hit a wall. And then everyone who 3:27:32 involved everyone involved, you have to switch the whole I think money is a lot like a language, 3:27:37 personally, everyone's gonna have to switch at like, basically the same time. That's part of 3:27:43 why I think everyone's so preoccupied with the price. But so I don't know, I think that it's 3:27:47 very weird. And then for Peter Todd to say that it is a block size increase is untrue. Because, 3:27:54 first of all, the proposal, there's a line of code that changes the block size. And this line, 3:27:58 this 5300 does not change that line of code. But also the idea of what what the block size is, 3:28:06 is has nothing to do with what miners do. Absolutely nothing whatsoever. 3:28:11 It's just the cost of running an L1 full node. So if the miners need to do natural gas, 3:28:18 flaring credits, or the miners need to buy a six, and they can't make it with FPGA, 3:28:23 or CPU mining, that they need to do that has nothing what miners do has nothing to do with 3:28:29 the block size debate, it was all about how difficult it would be to run a node, 3:28:33 how difficult it would be to measure confirmations for yourself without relying on someone else. 3:28:38 The node is like the cell, it's like a bacterial cell. So if all the cells are killed, 3:28:44 the node cell can regenerate, just like the character cell from Dragon Ball Z. 3:28:52 Okay, maybe these analogies are, you know, they're very good. But the point is, 3:28:55 at one point, he goes down to one cell, you know, I'm talking about Vlad, and then that's it. 3:29:01 Because each cell has the same DNA, one node can regenerate the whole network if it shuts down. 3:29:07 So it's the cost of starting up the new node is the cost of the cell dividing. 3:29:11 That is the only thing that matters. And what miners need to do, if we cared about that, 3:29:15 we would just remove the difficulty adjustments from blocks. And then Peter is going to say 3:29:18 something about like, what about the fixed cost of mining? There really is no such thing, 3:29:23 because the miners are going to minimize their costs using whatever combination of fixed and 3:29:27 variable costs they find appropriate for their time horizon. And that's always been the case, 3:29:31 and that always will be the case. The fixed cost of running these nodes is also basically zero 3:29:37 anyway. It costs nothing because the regular users have to run these nodes. 3:29:42 If the nodes are too expensive, the miners will all use Blind Merged Mining to shirk the cost. 3:29:47 So that cost is zero. So the whole thing is just gigantic. Anyone who says that it is a 3:29:52 block size increase is completely and totally false. This is my attempt, honestly, to protect 3:29:57 the block size limit and keep it small. And so I completely and totally disagree with that 100%. 3:30:05 And then I wrote the word social, but I don't remember why. Oh, I think he's... Oh, 3:30:11 because Giacomo is talking about the scars of the block size war. But now you start to see, 3:30:18 now they're really talking about it. Because now what they're kind of saying is, except for Peter 3:30:23 Todd, and who knows what John Carvalho is saying, I really don't. I think he's getting a little bit 3:30:30 of a Vinnie Gupta blah, blah, blah kind of vibe. I don't even really know what he's talking about. 3:30:37 But what they're kind of saying now is we have no other good idea. This idea is good, 3:30:46 but a whole set of ideas can't even be discussed for an irrational social reason. And so we need 3:30:53 to wait until we're in a better mood. And you see then how just irrational it is. 3:31:00 The idea that we would wait is, I think, a risk, a very big risk. Why would we do that? 3:31:13 Well, I guess your proposal is too complex for most people to understand. 3:31:21 It just counts to 13,000. That's all it does on L1. 3:31:25 Most people never counted to more than 100, honestly. 3:31:30 Yeah, I know. Yeah. Oh, well, maybe we can do something. Maybe when I go to 3:31:38 Bitcoin Amsterdam and we'll get like a BIP300 exhibit somehow. 3:31:47 It'll just be a number. It'll be a giant wheel that spins to 13,000 and then spins back. I don't know. 3:31:55 I mean, they say this and this, but they don't even like... So I hate to play this card because 3:32:00 it is mean. But again, Giacomo, he didn't know that it was changed back to an opcode 3:32:05 a long time ago. So he was like, well, it's not really an opcode. But that means he hasn't opened... 3:32:09 I hate to play it because it really doesn't matter that much. But he has not... You could 3:32:14 prove that he has not opened the BIP text and just glanced at it to refresh his memory. 3:32:19 Because it says right at the beginning, op not 5. You know, so it's like... 3:32:30 You know, like, what do you want me to do? You know, even God needed a lump of clay when he 3:32:36 created man, right? So I can't literally do everything. All right, now let's see what Giacomo 3:32:43 has to say. 3:32:43 Of course, but some more nuanced takes about... I remember Rossi Manningfield proposing elastic 3:32:49 block size based on minimum fees. There were some proposals that were not completely retarded. So 3:32:56 maybe some people will start discussing them again. But the principle of not creating bad 3:33:02 precedence of minorities, organized minorities, to the BIP text, to the BIP text, to the BIP text, 3:33:11 organized minorities taking over the rules for everybody, and the principle of keeping the 3:33:15 network rules reliable, predictable, honest, backward compatibles, that's really the point 3:33:22 of the fork wars, even more the block size. I think that many participants of the block size 3:33:27 will not be opposed to... Actually, most of the people agreed to go to basically four megabytes 3:33:32 with SegWit. So most of the people were not really small blockers. They were like, 3:33:36 do not change Bitcoin, especially under the false pretense of some kind of emergency, 3:33:42 if we don't have the buy-in of all the economy for certain reason, predictable times, 3:33:48 and after a lot of thinking and testing and discussing. 3:33:53 Of course, also, I mean... 3:33:55 Thank you. You should not apply. That means I'm popular and I'm losing here. 3:34:00 Yeah, that was not unpopular. 3:34:01 Also, remember, like, a four, you know, SegWit was basically 4x block size increase. 3:34:06 4x is not very big. I mean, in, you know, in a system like Bitcoin, you would expect to have 3:34:11 safety margins. You know, you would expect the engineering to work still if the block size was 3:34:17 like 10x bigger, because you want to have a 10x safety margin on all this stuff. I mean, this is, 3:34:21 you know, like, what, half a trillion dollars worth of value right now? You want big safety 3:34:26 margins on this. And the thing with Drivechains is you get that safety, like, look at this way. 3:34:32 Could you go and run your node with maybe a 10x bigger hard drive? How much more would that really 3:34:38 cost you versus now being distracted by a whole bunch of bullshit political crap about doing 3:34:44 UASFs to go and save people's funds? The latter occupies much more value in terms of your time, 3:34:50 your attention, than a slightly more expensive computer. That's the real issue here. 3:34:56 And it's easier to hijack politically. 3:35:02 Well, again, I mean, it's designed so that people on layer one can't ignore it. 3:35:05 So he's right, it is the issue, but he doesn't seem to agree with me that I have solved it. 3:35:10 So if you don't want to pay attention to those UASFs, then don't, because absolutely nothing 3:35:16 bad can happen to you as a result of ignoring them. You don't have to participate in any of 3:35:20 these. Like I was saying, the security model involves, is based on fees, and it involves some 3:35:26 of the sidechains failing. So if it involves some of them failing, then how can it be that 3:35:33 I require people to care about UASFs to protect? No, I'm requiring some of them to fail. 3:35:38 I give examples. In the 2016 one, in the video, I give an example of how there's like competing 3:35:48 versions of a chain, and it's actually in everyone's best interest for miners to kill 3:35:52 the chain. So I want the miners to kill the chain. So I do not want the UASF to succeed. 3:35:57 It's completely the opposite of the case. So he's right about that being the issue, 3:36:02 but I have already fixed the issue. I preemptively fixed it. So 3:36:10 I don't know. It's not the issue he thinks it is. Just anyone who's listening, 3:36:14 you can ignore every Drivechain UASF, just like you ignore everything else probably. 3:36:23 And of course, as I said before, they're actually hard forks. They're not even UASF, they're UAHF. 3:36:27 Let me think of what else to say. The goal is to ignore... 3:36:40 Well, let me see. I wrote down some stuff. Okay. So I agree with Giacomo that the hard fork... 3:36:50 The problem was really the hard fork, I thought. I disagreed with large blockism. 3:36:58 Because I thought it'd be like the debt ceiling where it would just raise all the time and then 3:37:01 what's the point? But the issue is they had a terrible strategy and the hard fork is too 3:37:09 dangerous a tool. So I just thought they didn't know what they were doing and they did rush it. 3:37:17 And yeah, it's interesting. I mean, it's kind of a catch-22 because they say we have to 3:37:29 carefully discuss everything, but then only recently have they carefully discussed it. 3:37:34 And I think it's only because certain miners said they were very interested in activating 3:37:40 BIP300 that people are talking about it now. So I think it's a little bit of a... 3:37:44 We do suffer from a lack of an actual process because it just means that it is something of a 3:37:53 mob process. But yeah, it's disappointing that Peter Todd believes that... But it's interesting 3:38:02 that he's riffing here and then he read... He clearly read some of the stuff I was tweeting 3:38:09 in the run-up to TabConf while he was... If I'm remembering correctly, there was some time 3:38:14 in between. It was a week off or something. So he didn't say any of this about UASFs at all 3:38:23 in the debate with me. So I guess he... Here he's saying that's the main issue here, 3:38:29 but then when the debate with me, he switched back. He'd switched completely off of that 3:38:34 and didn't bring it up one time. And he didn't bring it up at all and he'd switched to this 3:38:40 minor fixed cost thing. So he had abandoned the... What he says here is the crucial thing. 3:38:48 He is something he abandoned when he had to debate me in person in Atlanta a week later. So 3:38:55 I don't know. I mean, I interpret that as him saying that he looked into it more and he realized 3:38:59 that it is not based on UASFs, it's based on fees. And that actually he realized that I do 3:39:05 want... I want some of them to fail, which makes it really impossible to argue that it relies on 3:39:11 UASFs since it's like, which UASF do I want? A failure or success. I say they rise or fall 3:39:18 in their fees. They're like restaurants. The threat of going bankrupt is what keeps 3:39:25 the quality high. 3:39:32 When shitcoiners debate weak subjectivity, like even if your node doesn't know the right 3:39:40 sequence of transaction, if it's slow enough, you will just go on Twitter and make it out socially. 3:39:46 But that's actually the part which is easier to manipulate. You can have any kind of gatekeeper 3:39:51 of the social discussion, can easily create a campaign in which you think if you read, 3:39:56 you know how the block size wars ended. But if you read the Reddit during the peak of the block 3:40:00 size wars, everybody was a super giga mega big blocker. It was just completely derailed. So 3:40:08 moving the consensus... I disagree with that. For me, it was always clear that the small blockers 3:40:15 had it. But it's interesting that he feels that way. I would be interested in hearing more about. 3:40:23 I definitely don't think of... r slash bitcoin was controlled by 3:40:30 Thamos, who was a small blocker or was very supportive. 3:40:35 So I don't know why he would even say that. That's a very strange thing to say. 3:40:38 I don't think very many people would agree with him, but maybe not. But 3:40:42 yeah, like discussion of block size increases and hard forks was like purged from r slash bitcoin. 3:40:50 That was one of the things Roger Ver wouldn't stop complaining about. He would complain about 3:40:54 it all the time. So I disagree with that. And this idea that again, it's social consensus. 3:41:00 This is only... if you're only on L1, none of this is affecting you. It's only if you're on L2 3:41:05 that you have to worry about a hypothetical persuasion of the miners to take the coins 3:41:09 for some reason. There is no sense in which the miners are convinced to send the coins to 3:41:16 a certain destination by humans. If the sidechain software, which is committed to, 3:41:23 you commit to the actual software when you create and the sidechain takes slot seven or something, 3:41:32 you commit to it. And that software, if you run it, it will tell you what the withdrawal hash is. 3:41:40 So there's no sense in which... I think there's this misconception that the miners all meet 3:41:45 and they meet like in Vatican City or something and they decide, okay, here's where all the 3:41:49 coins should go. But the sidechain software is what tells them. It tells everyone. 3:41:55 It tells literally everyone who runs the software for free, screams it. It's in the header of every 3:42:01 block. It's at the ribbon in the bottom of the GUI. It's everywhere. They know where it should 3:42:05 be. And if they want to do something else, they have to decide what that would be. It 3:42:09 has to be something that adds up to a transaction ID of a certain format of something that will be 3:42:15 withdrawn from the BIP300 UTXO. So it's very weird if they... The persuaders are really have a huge 3:42:25 amount of work cut out for them. So I don't know. I think that this is again, because Giacomo has 3:42:30 not read the BIT. 3:42:35 From the automatism of my node to some kind of social awareness that will magically spread around 3:42:42 is very risky because it makes Bitcoin highly susceptible to politics. 3:42:47 Don't forget you're susceptible to legal too. I mean, right now I have two lawsuits against me 3:42:52 from Craig Wright and one of them is to go recover his allegedly stolen coins. 3:42:57 And that is precisely the kind of legal action that you could expect when you go have people 3:43:01 losing coins and Drivechains that go fail and you could easily have miners being sued. 3:43:05 Miners being sued. Hey, you... 3:43:08 You could, but it, you know, like, there's no sense in which, like, who are they going to sue? 3:43:16 Like a mining pool? All of the mining pools? One, you know, if you ever win, the mining pool can 3:43:22 the mining pool can just dissolve. This is the software we should 3:43:30 build. All the mining pools can like declare bankruptcy and just reform. 3:43:34 Like with a click of a button. But it's, I don't think, you know, you could sue, 3:43:41 but that's not how it would work. Because what would happen is there would be a 3:43:47 a failure on the sidechain. And there would be something like whatever the DAO, 3:43:52 and there'd be something over there, but it would be according to Ethereum's rules, 3:43:55 it would have the correct withdrawal. And by the time, by the time you could even do this, 3:44:00 the coins would have changed hands and they would be new owners withdrawing. 3:44:05 That's in the case where the miners are not stealing. Maybe I'm not explaining this very well, 3:44:08 but I'm saying if there's some kind of hack or something confusing or something social or 3:44:11 whatever, it would be too, it would be like too difficult. It's only when, ironically, 3:44:17 it's only because the Ethereum DAO hack had this weird delay that it was even possible for them to 3:44:23 try to stop it. But if miners steal from the sidechain, in a sense, like the logic of BIP300 is 3:44:31 that they should steal if the fees don't justify the chain. So they are doing their job if they 3:44:38 steal. And the reason why they should not steal is because they want to maximize the long run 3:44:44 transaction fee volume. Everyone's afraid. If you use Drivechain, 3:44:49 you're afraid that your money will be stolen by miners. 3:44:52 But if you're a miner, you're afraid that no one will want to use the Drivechains and you won't get the fee revenue. 3:44:58 So it's a mutual fear Mexican standoff. 3:45:03 That is how it works. And yeah, you can always be sued. 3:45:07 I mean, that would be great. If lawsuits against miners, that would decentralize mining. 3:45:12 I would be in favor of that because that's what would be better at decentralizing mining. 3:45:17 What would be better at decentralizing mining than that? 3:45:21 If we have enough of those, eventually we'll have mining pools that are completely open source and completely behind Tor or something. 3:45:29 That would be great, I think. 3:45:31 But I mean, the fact that he uses Craig as Wright's frivolous lawsuit against him as an example of why we should care about lawsuits is, I think, actually 180 degrees defeating the point. 3:45:45 He's just saying any idiot can sue any other idiot about anything. So who cares about that? 3:45:52 But it's true that I guess there's a tiny nugget of truth in that it does create salient days and salient events. 3:46:02 Like this is the day of the withdrawal, kind of like the having. 3:46:07 So it creates salient days. 3:46:11 And I can say, on this day, something else should have happened. 3:46:15 Isn't it ironic, though, that you were just telling me before that Luke Dashjr. said the advantage of Liquid is that you can sue the people who withdraw. 3:46:26 Now it's a disadvantage because those people can be sued. 3:46:29 Blah, blah, blah, you know, like whatever, right? 3:46:33 You can't win. That's the point. 3:46:40 You failed to go and mine the right side of that fork, effectively. 3:46:45 You failed to prevent the theft happening. 3:46:48 You have a duty of care to go and like run the sidechain client and to go and validate those rules to make sure that fork didn't happen. 3:46:55 You know, you were being negligent by not running that code. 3:46:58 Oh, you're a small miner? Oh, you just run like P2 pool or something? 3:47:02 Well, I mean, you're being very irresponsible here. 3:47:04 Why don't you go mine at a proper pool that can afford to go and do its job? 3:47:08 Like we don't want that. 3:47:10 Do you agree, basically, why we should have just put Peter between Sergey and John? 3:47:16 Yeah, I want to address this P2 pool thing, because he brought it up before and I didn't address it. 3:47:22 But Peter really wants everyone to use P2 pool. 3:47:27 And he really doesn't like the idea that there's a loss of efficiency. 3:47:32 There are a lot of interesting ideas for changing the way people... 3:47:38 But for those of you who don't know, P2 pool was this neat idea where it was a decentralized mining pool. 3:47:45 And it had interesting properties, such as when it found a block, the Coinbase paid out to like a ton of people. 3:47:53 Because it paid everyone out like immediately. 3:47:56 So the Coinbase would be huge. 3:47:59 I don't know how many outputs it had, but it was a lot. 3:48:02 Thousands. 3:48:04 And that, of course, made it kind of inefficient. 3:48:09 Because the more efficient thing that involves some trust to do would be to just have an account with the pool in mind. 3:48:18 And then your account goes up and then cash out. 3:48:20 But of course, that has the downside of requiring trust. 3:48:23 Various people have mentioned different inventions and things over the years of trying to solve this problem. 3:48:29 But the problem doesn't seem to really exist. 3:48:30 Because, like I said, the way the pool works is the miners can fire their pool almost at any time. 3:48:40 They can point their hash at a completely different pool. 3:48:42 They probably don't want to or whatever. 3:48:44 They like their pool, but they have a relationship with their pool. 3:48:47 But the pool cannot easily... 3:48:50 It's easy to start a new pool. 3:48:52 It's not as easy to just spin up a new mining facility that has 15% of the hash rate. 3:48:57 That would cost a fortune. 3:48:58 And it's just like enormous organizational complexity, etc. 3:49:03 So for Peter, it's really important that mining not have a lot of trust. 3:49:10 But my point of view is that this is an admirable goal. 3:49:17 But I think he just doesn't understand Bitcoin mining. 3:49:20 Because Bitcoin mining is a relentless push for efficiency every two weeks. 3:49:25 So every single stone that can be turned over and every single idea, the depths of every idea that can be plumbed. 3:49:38 So it's not just that they'll cut a couple corners to get a little bit of efficiency and they'll cut and P2Pool will be a victim. 3:49:48 It's like everything will be a victim. 3:49:50 It's just in the name of efficiency. 3:49:52 And so I don't... 3:49:55 The P2Pool thing, to me, it just highlights the fact that Peter Todd doesn't understand mining. 3:50:01 I mean, I hate to be so dismissive, but what he's saying is like... 3:50:06 What he's really saying, I'm not sure if this will make sense or not, but he's saying something like this. 3:50:12 If I declare to the world tomorrow, I say I'll give every miner $10 a year if they join my pool. 3:50:18 What Peter is saying is that this will centralize mining. 3:50:25 Because everyone will be going through me and I will be able to deny people the $10. 3:50:31 But my point of view is that it's all just like kind of missing the point, which is that miners need to... 3:50:39 They don't want to censor and they want to cut their costs to the bare minimum. 3:50:42 So they will cut everything. 3:50:44 And the important thing is that we run our layer one full node to protect us against the miners' mistakes. 3:50:50 So it's my view that the nodes outrank the miners. 3:50:54 But I don't think Peter Todd realizes that his view is the reverse. 3:50:59 But I guess it's for the audience to decide if they can make any sense of any of this. 3:51:03 The miners may make mistakes or they may do things that we don't like. 3:51:09 But our nodes will protect us. 3:51:10 Our nodes enforce the difficulty adjustments. 3:51:13 Our nodes check every block to make sure that it's valid. 3:51:18 And the transactions, we don't want them to be censored. 3:51:24 So we attach a little bribe. 3:51:26 But yeah, Peter is trying to make all these arguments that say basically the arguments are of the form, 3:51:32 if a miner is very, very inefficient, shouldn't we cut them like, you know, miner welfare or something? 3:51:37 You know, miner EBT card. 3:51:38 And maybe because we want them to be using a P2 pool or something. 3:51:48 Because this problem of the concentration in powerful pools is really widespread. 3:51:56 But I don't have that view at all. 3:51:58 And my view is that pools have no agency and that if a pool makes a mistake 3:52:02 and does something financially or economically irresponsible or even culturally irresponsible, 3:52:08 that the clients of the pool will just leave. 3:52:13 So they have a huge amount of leverage. 3:52:15 They can walk out at any time. 3:52:17 It's like they live in a country where they can press like a teleport button and leave. 3:52:20 Well, no one really likes my analogies. 3:52:22 But the, you know, they can leave. 3:52:27 The pools are so vulnerable relative to the hashers. 3:52:31 And they only exist because the variance reduction makes them very important. 3:52:38 And it makes it so that they have their brand is the only thing they have. 3:52:43 And so everyone makes these pie charts. 3:52:45 It's these darn pie charts, I tell you. 3:52:48 And it's because just because the data is available, they decide, I'll make a pie chart. 3:52:54 And then everyone looks at the pie chart and they think, oh, my gosh, we don't like that. 3:52:57 Foundry has such a big slice. 3:52:59 They say, how can we get rid of that? 3:53:02 My view is all of that is just a giant misinterpretation of what Bitcoin mining is and what pools do. 3:53:11 Pools make it easy for the small guy to mine because they get rid of the variance reduction. 3:53:15 Anyway, I don't know. 3:53:17 He's saying like we should care about. 3:53:19 We'll do and we'll sacrifice anything. 3:53:22 We'll sacrifice global scale. 3:53:23 We'll sacrifice Zcash privacy just so that P2Pool can have an advantage that's not even real. 3:53:32 Because it's just as easily like the mining fixed costs are already zero and they can already switch pools at the drop of a hat. 3:53:43 So, I mean, P2Pool was interesting, but people don't use it. 3:53:49 I think we should build some more stuff. 3:53:53 I think Ben Ark has it right where it's like if there's a problem, people will build the solution. 3:54:00 So what we should really do is wait for pools to start misbehaving, which currently they don't. 3:54:06 And then we should build stuff to make it very, very easy to just switch pools. 3:54:11 But I think everyone knows that that would come and that's why pools have always been very well behaved. 3:54:16 It's too easy to leave the pool. 3:54:17 Anyway, this is a rambling answer now, but P2Pool is suggesting that existing pools are doing something wrong, but they really aren't. 3:54:26 And that's why people use them because actually they don't do. 3:54:31 They have yet to do anything inappropriate. 3:54:37 John and talk about zero confirmation and RBF. 3:54:41 We messed up. 3:54:43 How about since we keep talking so much about the block size war and there's been, what, six years now, 3:54:51 it would be interesting to discuss the review and sort of in hindsight to see, you know, 3:54:57 which arguments were presented by each side and like hindsight bias. 3:55:03 Like there are a few that the big blockers got right. 3:55:07 You know, I haven't changed my opinion on the subject, but some arguments ended up being true in retrospect. 3:55:15 The problem is they hung everything on a hard fork. 3:55:18 That was the problem. 3:55:20 You couldn't have a conversation where we don't have any technology or any research where we can confidently do a transfer of value during a hard fork. 3:55:28 Yeah, I'm not looking to redo the debate. 3:55:30 It's a good proposal, but we'll have to do it next time, guys, because time is up. 3:55:34 We were deciding back then to scale smart rather than just make blocks bigger. 3:55:41 And it sounds to me like some people just want to make blocks bigger now. 3:55:44 Unfortunately, we're not going to make our time slot any bigger, but we could vote for that. 3:55:52 Guys, thank you so much for sharing your unpopular opinions. 3:55:55 This was fun. 3:56:04 I don't think I would have rambled so much if I knew we were only moments from the end. 3:56:08 Well, I mean, I hope someone got something out of this, my reaction to the panel. 3:56:13 That's interesting that it ate up the entire panel. 3:56:16 And I don't know. 3:56:21 I don't know if anything left to be said. 3:56:23 Is anyone still listening? Probably not, right? 3:56:25 Who would make it four? I mean, Bitcoin and Sensor routinely go six hours. 3:56:29 Everyone I know in Bitcoin listens to the whole thing. 3:56:33 Every time. So I think. 3:56:35 Who knows? 3:56:37 Yeah, this was almost four hours long. 3:56:40 We're about to hit that mark. 3:56:42 But it's certainly interesting the way that they poked fun at voting and the fact that they became so loose when it comes to the idea of increasing the block size. 3:56:51 They're like, yeah, they see it as a compromise. 3:56:57 Yeah. 3:57:00 I mean, I wonder about that. 3:57:04 I do wonder about that. 3:57:06 So, I mean, Peter Todd, he considers it a block size increase if miners are persuaded to do it at all, even the tiniest amount. 3:57:14 So to him, like buying an ASIC is a block size increase or is it? 3:57:21 I don't know. 3:57:25 Yeah, I'm also reading the chat right now, and that kind of sucks that I hear feedback from your speakers. 3:57:31 I hope I can remove that when I edit the audio. 3:57:36 But I see that there's someone. 3:57:40 What's his name? 3:57:42 Just for the record, it's 2 a.m. here. 3:57:45 So sorry if I mess up. 3:57:47 Sanny C. 3:57:50 Broker. 3:57:52 Is he broker? 3:57:53 I don't know, but he's trying to suggest that there are many other proposals in Bitcoin. 3:57:59 Other than Drivechains, and they should also be taken into consideration. 3:58:04 And basically, correct me if I'm wrong, but he's saying that. 3:58:11 You know, Drivechains is not the ultimate solution to everything, and there is other stuff like MAST and state chains, L2. 3:58:22 Payment channels. 3:58:28 There's also the covenants debate, which is going on. 3:58:32 We should consider everything, but has this one even been considered? 3:58:37 What does it mean to have been considered when literally the people up there haven't read the BIP? 3:58:42 And the one guy hadn't heard about it until two days before. 3:58:48 So what does that mean? 3:58:51 By considered, does he mean that no one should read the BIP and people should just make up stuff about it on Twitter? 3:58:58 Is that what he means? 3:59:00 I get that you're upset that people don't read the BIP, but at the same time you have budget to hire an intern. 3:59:08 And you're choosing to post memes as opposed to try to educate people on how this works. 3:59:14 Well, like Twitter education, I think is probably, if you've come to Twitter for education, like there's my own Twitter and there's my own highlights. 3:59:31 If you click my highlights, I think that you will find a ton there. 3:59:36 And that's an enormous amount of information. 3:59:40 And I think there's only like 20 highlighted tweets. 3:59:44 So you could read them all in half an hour probably. 3:59:49 Even though some are dense, you could read and consider them all. 3:59:54 I mean, what did he even list? Masks? What? We already have that. 3:59:59 Did they not know that's part of taproot payment channels? 4:00:03 We already have that also. We actually had that before. 4:00:05 We had T.R. Nolan channels in 2014. Satoshi also invented those. 4:00:10 So what is this person talking about? 4:00:12 Can you read the list again? 4:00:14 What, should we have paid to script hash also? 4:00:17 I don't think that's in there. 4:00:20 But anyway, there's also Arthur Pug and I guess I have been ignoring him for a while. 4:00:25 He keeps on talking about Truthcoin. 4:00:28 He says that it has been a ghost town for a while and that you get plenty of listening time, Paul. 4:00:33 It would help your case if your Truthcoin ideas were auditable. 4:00:38 What does that mean, auditable? 4:00:42 I don't know. 4:00:45 What's the first thing he said? 4:00:47 Truthcoin idea, aka Bitcoin Hivemind now. 4:00:53 What? 4:00:55 I'm not sure what he means. 4:00:58 And that he still likes you, but by the straw man, which he hears on both sides, albeit a bit more from Paul than this time. 4:01:12 Okay. 4:01:14 What's the straw man now? 4:01:16 What's the straw man now? 4:01:20 That you present when you explain that, for example, this is an emergency and we need to activate BIP300 faster. 4:01:29 I mean, sooner than later. 4:01:32 And maybe that we should not wait four years or whatever for this to happen. 4:01:37 Yeah, I think we should. 4:01:38 I mean, well, it's a very old and I think if the best argument is it's a block size increase because miners have costs. 4:01:47 And every minor cost is a block size increase. 4:01:50 So every time the difficulty adjusts upward, that's a block size increase. 4:01:55 If that's what they think, then the conversation is basically over, I think. 4:02:02 But yeah, I think it's also like, what if it really is an emergency? 4:02:08 Like, has anyone thought of that? 4:02:10 Like, what about all the popularity of Ethereum and its fees? 4:02:14 And what about the likelihood that someone out there will invent something and launch it? 4:02:19 They'll just launch it. 4:02:21 They're not going to wait. 4:02:23 So when it was a cool idea, they're not going to wait and do the BIP process. 4:02:26 Is that what you think they're going to do? 4:02:28 Of course not. 4:02:29 And then if they succeed, then the coin will go to zero. 4:02:32 And what would we do if something was a big success? 4:02:35 We would just ignore it and we would just say, whatever, infinity over 21 million. 4:02:43 Right? 4:02:45 Well, it's not selling money. 4:02:47 It doesn't have immaculate conception. 4:02:49 Exactly. 4:02:50 That's what we would say. 4:02:52 So if the cyber hornets would just kill each other, we would kill ourselves. 4:03:00 Well, you have to understand that ideas take time. 4:03:04 And getting adoption... 4:03:06 Well, I do. 4:03:07 But again, you know the idea is from 2015. 4:03:10 So now I kind of think like, maybe I made a huge mistake by going slow. 4:03:15 And it was actually me who killed... 4:03:17 When historians write the book, they're going to say, Paul killed Bitcoin. 4:03:19 Because he had the winning idea the whole time. 4:03:22 But he would just kind of shrug and say, whatever. 4:03:25 He wouldn't do anything about it. 4:03:27 Now, it sounds as if you're blackmailing everyone with the idea that you might as well launch a new chain, which deploys Drivechains. 4:03:35 And you're going to get all that action that Bitcoin is not going to be getting anymore. 4:03:40 And that's going to kill it. 4:03:42 Is that the consequence of events? 4:03:44 Am I following this correctly? 4:03:45 No, I'm saying if someone else... 4:03:47 I'm saying if someone else has a great idea, that's very good. 4:03:53 If we lived in a world that had BIP300 sidechains, we'd be able to just copy the idea at any time. 4:03:58 So it would never have any real teeth. 4:04:00 But we live instead in a world where, in fact, we have gouged out our own eyes. 4:04:06 Because we say we won't even look at something somewhere else. 4:04:10 And they think Giacomo is still living in the 2016 Bitcoin Uncensored world of six years ago. 4:04:17 We're saying that, hey, have you heard about databases? 4:04:20 And he's still saying, ha, ha, ha, I can have a database and I just relabel the tables and the tabs as blocks or whatever. 4:04:29 That's what he thinks a smart thought is. 4:04:32 A thought that's six years old. 4:04:34 Back when there was no altcoin activity. 4:04:37 There was one one thousandth of fees. 4:04:39 Now it's many times, hundreds of times on certain days. 4:04:46 So it's like an eight orders of magnitude difference. 4:04:52 But instead, Giacomo has become orders of magnitude less accurate in the things that he says. 4:04:59 They used to be accurate. 4:05:01 Now they're very inaccurate. 4:05:03 So that's the problem. 4:05:05 The problem is the people. 4:05:07 And so if there's a good idea, it will take over and then Bitcoin will go to zero. 4:05:13 And then historians will be like, wow, that was weird. 4:05:15 And they'll say, this guy had the idea the whole time that would have stopped, would have helped make sure that instead of going to zero, it was Bitcoin that went to 20 million dollars a coin. 4:05:26 And isn't it funny that he was so passive about the idea? 4:05:30 So I'm not referring to anything that I'm saying if I do nothing, it would kill Bitcoin. 4:05:35 I'll be blamed. 4:05:39 Now, I can see how some people are going to take this section and make memes out of it. 4:05:44 Sure. 4:05:45 And say that you're a megalomaniac and you're thinking that you're the savior or whatever. 4:05:50 But before we move on, let me play another ad. 4:05:53 Just grab a drink, Paul. 4:05:54 Relax a bit. 4:05:55 I also want to ask you about stuff that was mentioned during the Peter Todd debate and then we can wrap this up. 4:06:02 OK, great. 4:06:05 Shop and Bit is the online store where you can buy anything with your Bitcoin. 4:06:10 Choose between more than 800,000 products, book flights and hotels and order everything else through the concierge service. 4:06:17 With Shop and Bit, you can buy your weekly groceries, get the latest iPhone, upgrade your computer, buy something sexy for your new girlfriend, book a trip to El Salvador through the travel hacking service and also grab a copy of the latest Bitcoin takeover magazine to read in the airplane. 4:06:32 Everything is integrated with a familiar shopping experience that doesn't track you and deletes your data after the order gets completed. 4:06:40 You also get a 3% discount if you pay in Bitcoin. 4:06:44 Try Shop and Bit today and use promo code BTCTKVR for a 5 euro discount on your first order. 4:06:51 I think we broke the record for the longest ever episode of my podcast and I still haven't reached the Bitcoin uncensored levels. 4:07:01 I'm also proud of everyone who has listened this far. 4:07:06 Hit that like button. 4:07:07 Subscribe. 4:07:08 It helps with getting discovered and stuff. 4:07:12 But Paul, we established that we'd also talk about your debate with Peter Todd. 4:07:17 And this is the final part of our talk tonight. 4:07:21 Is there anything that was discussed there that we did not discuss so far? 4:07:27 Well, as I already mentioned, he didn't mention any of this USF. 4:07:32 He didn't build his case around this USF thing. 4:07:35 I think he did mention at one point that there could be like 200 different sidechains and there would be a lot to pay attention to. 4:07:44 But again, the model does not rely on people's attention. 4:07:49 It's designed to really, really limit how exposed people's attention is and also to be fully ignorable so that if you don't care at all, you don't need to. 4:07:59 So that's a bunch of irrelevant. 4:08:04 The point is irrelevant, but on that criterion, it does perfectly. 4:08:11 It does not affect, you know, you don't need to pay attention to any of this. 4:08:19 You run a fully validating node. 4:08:22 It's not even the way it was with the old software, but I don't know, maybe it's too arcane. 4:08:26 The debate, you know, I don't know, I think there's, you know, I think multiple people recorded it. 4:08:33 So I don't know. 4:08:35 No one has posted it yet, I guess. 4:08:37 I don't know why not, or maybe it just takes a while. 4:08:40 I hope that it is posted because I think people will get a lot out of it. 4:08:44 I think it is. 4:08:49 The format was just him asking me questions. 4:08:53 So I thought this was good for TabConf, which is very academic. 4:08:58 So I thought I will just be passive and I will just let him ask whatever questions he wants to ask and then I will answer. 4:09:04 We didn't really talk about any of the benefits. 4:09:07 We just talked about various complaints Peter Todd had, which revolved around miners having fixed costs and that this is a block size increase. 4:09:15 So to him, anything that he designates as a mining fixed cost is a block size increase because regular users need to run them and if the cost rises too much, they will all use BIP301 to just shirk the cost. 4:09:37 So either the costs are small and it's a moot point and no one cares either way. 4:09:42 Or the costs are very large and then BIP301 sends them to zero. 4:09:51 So the whole thing, I don't know, the whole thing was nonsense. 4:09:56 But everyone should listen, don't take my word for it. 4:10:03 Okay. 4:10:03 There was also some voting and they decided who won the debate and you 4:10:08 tweeted something about it. 4:10:11 Yeah, I would personally, I would like a recount, but I think he did win. 4:10:15 But what really happened was we started it off, the room was packed. 4:10:19 Everyone was giving us a lot of attention and they had people vote for and against. 4:10:25 And it was like four to five against me, but the point is only nine people in 4:10:31 this giant room voted at all. 4:10:33 So everyone was like in the camp of like not having an opinion. 4:10:43 And still at the end of the debate, still, most people didn't vote. 4:10:48 They voted for being confused and having no opinion. 4:10:52 So, and I think TAPCOMP is kind of like the creme de la creme of technical talent. 4:11:02 So I think the appropriate interpretation is just that it's a very confusing issue 4:11:06 that people, you know, gain some more clarity over. 4:11:12 And, but yeah, he did, we went from like four or five to like 23. 4:11:20 And if you, if you're asking me, he got like maybe like 28, 29, but 4:11:24 they said he got like, well, whatever. 4:11:27 Some guys shouted 40 or something like moments afterwards. 4:11:31 I just ran with that, but I think he did get more votes. 4:11:34 I don't think that, but nothing he said made any sense. 4:11:37 Oh, so, I mean, maybe it was, I don't think I'm the best debate and I was a 4:11:41 very, I took a very passive style of just letting him ask whatever he wanted to ask. 4:11:47 And so of course it looks bad if we just spend the whole thing 4:11:50 talking about various risks. 4:11:54 I mean, you weren't, you didn't, you weren't able to attend, so you didn't 4:11:56 see it and no one has posted a recording yet publicly in the Drivechain, telegram 4:12:07 group, Michael Tidwell, the organizer of TabConf and the moderator, he posted a 4:12:13 message that said something like he didn't realize that Peter had not prepared and 4:12:17 he didn't, he had come not really knowing the details of, you know, what the drive 4:12:25 chain proposal was and asked me about them on stage. 4:12:29 So we're getting his like off the cuff. 4:12:33 So, I mean, what does that mean, Vlad? 4:12:35 You get on stage, you're on, you take the anti side of a debate, but you don't know 4:12:40 about it. 4:12:41 You ask about it and then you say, well, maybe this would be bad. 4:12:47 You know, like what, you know, like whatever, but, but yeah, it was, I mean, if 4:12:54 you have any, do you have any more specific questions? 4:12:58 Well, there is someone in the chat who argues that, I mean, it's nothing new, 4:13:04 nothing that wasn't discussed before, but it's mostly about Drivechains, enabling 4:13:09 scams and ICOs and stuff that. 4:13:13 Yeah, but it doesn't though, of course. 4:13:14 So that person should understand that they are incorrect. 4:13:20 Go on. 4:13:21 Isn't it clear, though, they already, ICOs and things, those can already be done on any 4:13:26 chain, including Bitcoin because of ERC, because of like colored coins, counterparty, 4:13:36 tarot, tapered assets. 4:13:38 I think it's been renamed RGB, all that stuff. 4:13:41 So and what are they called now, BRC20, ordinals, inscriptions. 4:13:48 So that's already the scams. 4:13:51 And so there's no marginal advantage from adding the 300 to the scams. 4:13:55 And in fact, it's all completely in reverse, completely 100% in reverse, because one way is 4:14:03 it just moves the scams off of layer one, off of Bitcoin, off of Bitcoin Core, onto the 4:14:08 layer two Drivechain, if they happen there instead. 4:14:11 And this is all besides the bigger picture, which is that by allowing the coins to travel to a 4:14:16 different piece of software, it obviates the need for any altcoin. 4:14:21 So the asset actually has some, must have some new purpose. 4:14:25 So it literally kills the shit coins off. 4:14:27 And if the Drivechains don't generate fees, if they aren't really used by actual people, 4:14:33 then they will actually literally die off because that is the security model of drive 4:14:38 chains that if it doesn't justify the fees, then it gets killed off. 4:14:41 So that person is wrong. 4:14:45 If we had Drivechains three years ago, I'm pretty sure that something like Terra Luna and 4:14:50 Celsius would have been built as sidechains on top of Bitcoin. 4:14:55 And of course, there are scams and there are Ponzi's. 4:14:58 They had, I guess, enough liquidity to bribe the miners to keep going. 4:15:02 And then when the entire Ponzi collapsed, there would be some news reports saying, look, 4:15:09 what happened on Bitcoin. 4:15:12 And this is a big concern for people who fear that some of these scams are going to end up 4:15:17 happening on Bitcoin layers. 4:15:19 And it's so much more convenient to point your finger at Ethereum, to point your finger at 4:15:24 some other chain, which is scammy. 4:15:26 And these chains have basically a budget for lobbying, for playing this political game. 4:15:33 And Bitcoin doesn't. 4:15:35 And, you know, people like to take this not necessarily innocent, but more like superior 4:15:47 stance. They're like, yeah, we are the ivory tower here on Bitcoin. 4:15:50 We don't have scams. 4:15:51 And each time there's a scam, it happens somewhere else. 4:15:53 So you should look elsewhere. 4:15:55 And now with Drivechains, you're going to have all of this media and governmental 4:15:59 attention and investigation. 4:16:00 Yeah, all this relevance and all these users and all of this. 4:16:04 Well, I mean, I guess I can partially understand where those people are coming from. 4:16:10 But again, the way I see it is we want we want users and we want the popularity. 4:16:15 And it was the same thing when Mt. 4:16:19 Gox was hacked. Everyone thought, oh, Bitcoin, wasn't it hacked? 4:16:22 People always think that Bitcoin is hacked. 4:16:24 And I think even with like FTX and stuff, people were saying people called me and they 4:16:30 were like, are you OK? 4:16:33 So even when it's not that we still pay the price as if it were. 4:16:37 So why don't we just actually make all these all these people Bitcoin users? 4:16:42 I don't actually think it will move the needle at all in terms of how much blame we 4:16:47 get. We already get blamed and already there's certain if people aren't willing to put 4:16:53 in that much effort, then it's just the news media is going to play a lot. 4:17:00 I, you know, the news media has always hated Bitcoin and it's it just meant that you 4:17:05 could buy cheaper coins for longer, accumulate your stack. 4:17:10 I'm not aware of really anyone who I think treats us fairly. 4:17:15 So. 4:17:20 They say, well, yeah, you know, I think any time you have like what would be. 4:17:26 The. 4:17:28 The Terra Luna thing. 4:17:31 A lot of it is like. 4:17:35 The I think a lot of it is like, well, it's hard to unpack without going into a huge 4:17:43 long rant, as I often do, but. 4:17:48 I think the line between. 4:17:57 Scam busting that we would do on Bitcoin Uncensored a lot, it feels good, but it doesn't 4:18:05 actually work. I wish that it did. 4:18:08 But we did all this scam busting on Bitcoin Uncensored and what actually what became of 4:18:13 it? All these people got scammed anyway. 4:18:17 The scams got, you know, they evolved and became more powerful. 4:18:21 And so what I, you know, a fool and his money are soon parted. 4:18:27 And I understand the desire to scam bust, because it's like you see this Bitcoin and 4:18:34 you like Bitcoin and then you see these other people. 4:18:37 And it's like. 4:18:39 This has none of the depth that Bitcoin had and you don't like them getting money. 4:18:43 But what I think now is that it is fundamentally irrational. 4:18:48 It is like this social justice warrior thing. 4:18:51 The idea that you're doing this to help other people is fake and is a self delusion. 4:18:59 And so the idea that we don't want we don't want these scams is anyone who pays the fee 4:19:06 for the blockchain is a user is what I'm driving at. 4:19:09 So if they are one, one thing is that like the ransomware used to be all Bitcoin still 4:19:18 mostly is, but and that was people made a joke and they said that the ransomware is 4:19:24 Bitcoin's killer app. 4:19:27 So that is literally like extortion and theft. 4:19:32 But people said, aha, this is look at how cypherpunk it is. 4:19:36 So people say, oh, blah, blah, blah. 4:19:38 I think all that's just cope. 4:19:39 They just think like, you know, they wish and actually secretly wish that was on Bitcoin 4:19:44 or that Ethereum. 4:19:45 They wish Ethereum had never been invented. 4:19:47 You know what I mean? If Ethereum had never been invented. 4:19:50 No one would blame and like imagine BIP300 had come out in like 2013. 4:19:56 And Ethereum had never been invented, but there was an EVM, what we would call an EVM 4:20:02 chain and had Terra Luna or whatever. 4:20:04 No one would say, oh, it's all because of BIP300. 4:20:08 No, they would say, why doesn't the media get the facts straight? 4:20:12 This has nothing to do with Bitcoin at all. 4:20:14 This is some some people who sold an investment and it was all fake and it was a Ponzi. 4:20:23 So so it has nothing to do with BIP300 at all. 4:20:26 The fact that it was invented on Ethereum first is just because we didn't get our side 4:20:30 chains back together in time. And it would be Bitcoin if we if we had. 4:20:36 And if we instead we separate, it will just be, you know, and I think this is all cope 4:20:42 to the idea that one chain is pristine and the other is a debt of thieves. 4:20:48 One has users. 4:20:52 There's also the statist argument, right, which says that you want you don't want the 4:20:57 police and investigations to come for the miners, to come for the developers, to come 4:21:02 for people who are into Bitcoin. 4:21:04 And it also goes back to this pristine argument. 4:21:07 But let's say that Terra Luna happened on an EVM sidechain of Bitcoin. 4:21:13 OK. Would the police not try to recover the funds from the miners that collected fees 4:21:19 from Terra Luna? 4:21:21 But what exactly would they want them to do? 4:21:24 They would the police would build a transaction that has a TXID that pays someone on L1. 4:21:30 So this is what I'm saying is the miners have a strict and carefully sanitized job of 4:21:36 just the sidechain reports a hash and then they transcribe it. 4:21:42 L2 to L1, one hash every three months. 4:21:46 So what they would really do is they would go to the L2 and they would say reorg the 4:21:52 chain or whatever. 4:21:53 And then but really they would do nothing because I think the answer is no. 4:21:59 They would try to find if they could find it, they need jurisdiction, of course, if they 4:22:02 could find a person, if they could find a human being that they could like arrest and put 4:22:07 in jail and say, we know you stole this money, send the money back and make this person 4:22:14 whole, they would probably do that. 4:22:15 But otherwise, I don't think they would. 4:22:18 In a way, though, it's sad that they don't, because, again, it's like as we get more 4:22:22 popular and we get more users, this type of thing would happen because but the fact that 4:22:26 it's not even happening because those users are on Ethereum, it's just saying this is 4:22:31 it's just underlining how. 4:22:35 That we have failed to acquire users and that the if we continue on that path for long 4:22:43 enough, it will doom the coin is going to zero. 4:22:47 I don't like it when you're this gloomy and you say that we're going to zero, if we 4:22:55 wait long enough, because in the long run, I think there are only one coin will win. 4:22:59 That's just my point of view. 4:23:00 I don't see why there's a need for a second coin. 4:23:02 Like I agree with Michael Saylor that there is no second best. 4:23:06 The problem is who will be the first best will be whoever gets to eight billion users 4:23:11 the fastest. 4:23:12 Well, it cannot go to zero because I will keep on buying, OK, are you sure that you 4:23:18 really will, though? 4:23:22 What if there's something that's really close, but just different? 4:23:26 Well, maybe that I want to own all 21 million coins. 4:23:29 Yeah, it's really. 4:23:33 After you do, what would the price be? 4:23:34 As much as I ask for it, yeah, but you have to find someone else who will pay, of course. 4:23:40 Who's going to buy a network where who's going to buy a coin that where you own 100 4:23:43 percent of the coins? 4:23:45 Well, that depends. 4:23:48 It's like an NFT, right? 4:23:50 I'm the issuer. 4:23:52 Each one has a history. 4:23:55 Yes. 4:23:58 So but OK, fair enough, then. 4:23:59 If we continue on this road long enough, then Bitcoin will just become an NFT there. 4:24:03 Are you happy now? 4:24:04 It is an NFT. 4:24:07 Well, that's the problem. 4:24:08 People don't appreciate it for its properties and they just think we need to just keep 4:24:12 cheering Bitcoin on and repeating the word Bitcoin over and over again and screeching it 4:24:16 on Twitter and on a podcast. 4:24:20 Mind virus, Bitcoin, they don't realize that it actually has properties, that it's 4:24:25 because everyone has been trained by the block size war and by, you know, sailor and these 4:24:30 other people to say that it has it has no it has no use. 4:24:33 It has no properties. 4:24:35 It has no function. 4:24:38 It's just a thing you buy and sell. 4:24:40 It's only a brand. 4:24:41 So, yeah, they have been trained to think of it as an NFT, and they don't really 4:24:46 understand why it has value. 4:24:47 And that's the problem. 4:24:48 And that's the problem. 4:24:50 To think of it as an NFT, and they don't really understand why it has value, independent 4:24:56 of how many other people. 4:25:00 Are aware of it. 4:25:04 Yeah, I was also reading the chat, I see that some people are commenting on stuff that we 4:25:09 are saying, and I agree to some degree, we have to realize that this is a cypherpunk 4:25:15 invention, you know, and if we keep on asking permission from others and waiting for the 4:25:21 state to approve of what we're doing, I mean, would Bitcoin exist at all if Satoshi had 4:25:27 this type of mindset that we need to be cautious? 4:25:29 No, it certainly would not. 4:25:30 If he if he if he had been waiting for everyone at Baltic Honeybradger to agree with him, 4:25:36 then it would never have existed. 4:25:37 Because think about how many people, myself included, what the first several times I heard 4:25:42 about Bitcoin, I thought this is the stupidest idea I've ever heard in my entire life. 4:25:45 So that's that's Giacomo Zucco, who still hasn't read the bit. 4:25:52 And it's also John Carvalho saying that because he thinks the peg won't hold, consenting 4:25:59 adults should not be free to, and he has no idea what he's talking about, and Peter Todd 4:26:04 saying it's a block size increase and whatever, it's all of that is absurd nonsense. 4:26:09 And people people will, I think, look back on this and they'll say, man, that was weird 4:26:14 how that simple idea was so misunderstood at the time. 4:26:19 It would be exactly the same as Bitcoin. 4:26:21 So, yeah, certainly Satoshi should not wait, should never wait. 4:26:24 It's the opposite of what Giacomo Zucco said about, oh, let's wait. 4:26:28 I don't I think that's a mistake. 4:26:31 That's probably what you know, that is what the people at Ethereum and Bitcoin Cash, that 4:26:37 is what they want BTC to do. 4:26:42 I personally agree with that, but when you get to this point where you have half a trillion 4:26:47 dollars and there are a lot of people who depend on that, we've made it to half a trillion. 4:26:54 You know. Why change from being. 4:27:00 Smart to being dumb, because it's not that. 4:27:04 Well, you know, how many soft forks did we do? 4:27:07 In the big run up to 2017, from 2009 to 2017, there were enormous, I don't know how many 4:27:18 more than 10. And a soft fork is something where not everyone needs to update, just a few 4:27:25 people. That's who ever wants to use the feature, and that's what this is. 4:27:29 So we're doing the new thing now where, you know, remember what Gavin used to have in 4:27:34 Andreessen, never invest more than you can afford to lose. 4:27:37 This project is an experiment. 4:27:40 So we're doing the opposite in many ways of what we did that made us a success. 4:27:45 We're saying, oh, the success is inevitable. 4:27:48 We don't need to focus on making the coin useful. 4:27:53 Making the coin useful, we don't need to. 4:27:59 You know, we don't we just buy and take out a mortgage on your house and invest everything 4:28:05 you have. That's what we say now. 4:28:08 We say the opposite of what we said, so we are doing a great job, I think, of, you know. 4:28:18 Challenging what made it great. 4:28:20 Now, it's interesting that you brought up Gavin Andreessen, who is basically a villain in 4:28:26 the Bitcoin space nowadays, mostly for acknowledging Craig Wright and refusing to 4:28:31 withdraw his support for his previous claim. 4:28:35 And yeah, I know you come from a different era and at the time, Gavin was a big figure and 4:28:41 everyone was looking up to him and he was working towards getting more developers to work 4:28:47 on Bitcoin and stuff like that. 4:28:50 OK, but he was also partially wrong about BIP 101, which was his proposal to, I think it 4:28:58 was to increase the to double the block size every couple of years and follow what he 4:29:03 thought was going to be Moore's law. 4:29:05 And that one did not get much traction. 4:29:08 And he was partially wrong, at least in the short to midterm, about Bitcoin. 4:29:16 He did not foresee like he was wrong about all kinds of things, of course, and. 4:29:25 Well, he was wrong about all kinds of things, but he I'm just saying that that attitude was 4:29:33 representative when he said, like, don't invest more than you can afford to lose. 4:29:36 This is still an experiment. 4:29:38 That was what most people said. 4:29:40 Some people did not, like, ironically, Roger Ver or some people were like, oh, like, I 4:29:43 remember Eric Voorhees, Eric Voorhees was like, when are you going to have people ask 4:29:49 him, when are you going to cash out all of your Bitcoin? 4:29:51 And he said. I did cash out into Bitcoin and everyone would like clap and. 4:29:59 You remember that? That was like 2012 or something. 4:30:02 No, I'm not that OG. 4:30:04 I was 20 years old in 2012, trying to get laid in university like every 20 year old. 4:30:14 Fair enough, but I'm just saying that it was some people were went all in and there was 4:30:22 like a Michael Saylor or whatever. 4:30:24 And but I don't think anyone took its success for granted. 4:30:29 Everyone saw the potential. 4:30:31 But, you know, like Roger Ver would be out there every day trying to, like, get more 4:30:35 merchants to accept Bitcoin, you know, you had BitPay, the big companies were like there 4:30:41 to do something. 4:30:42 And by big companies, I mean, they were really small, but they had a mailing address or 4:30:49 something. So, yeah, and the Blockstream was created to do this sidechains idea. 4:30:56 2014, 2015. 4:31:00 It's interesting that I think only Adam Backwith, the CEO of Blockstream right now, is 4:31:06 the he's the only one in the company that agrees with your proposal for Drivechains. 4:31:12 And I see everyone else, including I think I had a very long talk with Matthew Heywood, 4:31:17 and he thinks I debate in bad faith and I'm blinded by, I don't know, I'm blinded by 4:31:23 this idea of merge mining and he thinks it's a very bad idea. 4:31:28 But everyone seems so passionately against it for some reason, as if either they're 4:31:36 bitter that they could not pull it off and they don't want someone else to do it or else 4:31:41 they they think that Liquid is so good and it should not be improved upon or at least 4:31:48 there should not be competition for it. 4:31:50 I guess some people's lives depend on Liquid, you know? 4:31:55 Sorry, what? 4:31:58 What? I didn't hear what you said. 4:32:00 Some people's livelihoods, you know, they make a living working. 4:32:03 Yes, of course. They're the competition. 4:32:06 So it's highly improper to ask Blockstream or even people from Lightning for their 4:32:11 opinion. Nonetheless, though, I have most of the actually elite people. 4:32:17 I have some kind of endorsement from them on LayerTwoLabs.com slash friends, so it's the 4:32:23 people at the top who are so smart and they have so much prestige that they know they'll 4:32:27 be safe even after this idea wins. 4:32:31 Yeah, but you know, this is not about people. 4:32:34 I mean, of course, Bitcoin is a network that's supposed to be used by people, but it's not 4:32:38 about endorsements or appeal to authority. 4:32:41 It's about code and code review and. 4:32:44 As far as I know, you hired Luke Junior to formalize your proposal into a better form 4:32:50 that's going to be discussed as a BIP. 4:32:53 Yes, we have software already that we have software, but we don't have a pull request, has 4:32:59 various forms and things. 4:33:02 So it has various like conventions and. 4:33:06 We are going to do like translate what we had done into what would be good for Bitcoin 4:33:10 core. To make it easier to review and these other things like that, but no, you're 4:33:15 completely right. It's extremely inappropriate for people to ask someone who works on the 4:33:20 liquid what they think, you know, that's not peer review at all. 4:33:23 That's just corruption and that's, you know, impropriety. 4:33:28 It would be literally like asking, you know, Donald Trump what he thinks of whatever 4:33:34 birdies, Joe Biden or something. 4:33:36 It's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's 4:33:40 it's ridiculous or asking Zelensky what he thinks of Putin. 4:33:45 So it's, you know, like people should do that because in the professions, there's so much 4:33:51 specialization, but people should just keep in mind that like. 4:33:56 So like what did Haywood have anything to actually say about the BIP that he didn't like? 4:34:01 He doesn't like merge mining. 4:34:03 Well, he doubled down on the idea of minor stealing and the fact that you should not give 4:34:09 more power to the miners because most likely it's the end user chooses if they wish to eat at 4:34:15 that restaurant or not. 4:34:19 Of course, but there's all of that concern, which I expressed earlier about the end user 4:34:25 should be free to decide what security model they want. 4:34:30 Many of them already have. 4:34:32 They will switch to whatever Ethereum or Solana if it has something that they want. 4:34:37 We're not libertarians here, Paul, and we haven't been for a long time. 4:34:41 Yeah, right. 4:34:43 So they said raise your hand if you have Bitcoin, raise your hand if you own Ethereum and like 80 4:34:46 percent of the room raised their hand and they were like people on stage were shocked. 4:34:51 But it's like. 4:34:52 Regular people will do whatever they want to do. 4:34:52 They won't do what Peter Todd wants them to do. 4:34:55 It's very naive. 4:34:56 So it's the miners can steal is by far the worst argument because, of course, the miners can more easily steal from the Lightning Network than they can from Drivechain. 4:35:07 People push back on this because of how anti-lightning it is, but not because they've thought about it. 4:35:11 So the, you know, like the miners can steal is terrible, not only because it's it's just literally missing the point of the whole why they would not, which is that it would end the fees, which will be many times what they're going to be getting on L1. 4:35:30 But most important of all, and this is the point is the end user to decide if they want to spend their they want to sell their Bitcoin for cash, that's up to them. 4:35:40 And if they want to sell their Bitcoin and buy it for cash, that's up to them. 4:35:45 And if they want to sell their Bitcoin and buy an altcoin, then that's up to them. 4:35:49 And if they want. 4:35:50 So if that's all that you have to say, then he just he hates the user. 4:35:53 He hates Opensource. 4:35:54 He hates creativity. 4:35:55 He hates freedom and he hates Bitcoin. 4:36:00 Because now there is only Bitcoin. 4:36:02 Right. You're supposed to ignore everything else. 4:36:14 It's a shit coin. 4:36:15 It's not sound money. 4:36:16 Yeah. 4:36:17 But then the same people love the same people love their plan with push comes to shove those people same plan is custodial lightning for the world. 4:36:30 So it's absurd. 4:36:32 It's literally absurd. 4:36:34 No, there's a lot of money to be made in that. 4:36:37 So it's often a nefarious combination of people's stock options or whatever. 4:36:43 And it's pure corruption, basically. 4:36:48 And it's not in the interest of the end user, which is the most important thing. 4:36:53 The reply to the whole custodial lightning situation is that, well, they can always spin up a node because it's permissionless and they can transfer over to their own channel. 4:37:02 Yeah, but we can still do that in the in my paradigm. 4:37:06 They can spin up a node, they can spin up to a channel, they could settle the coins back to L1. 4:37:11 They have a cheap L1 node and maybe an expensive L2 node. 4:37:16 But really not that expensive, honestly. 4:37:18 And again, it's up to the end user to decide. 4:37:22 So that's all that they have. 4:37:25 Then you see, you know, the line between good and evil is drawn kind of, you know, you can see how it's drawn. 4:37:39 Paul, there's a prophecy here of which you're not even aware. 4:37:42 It was in January of 2019 when I did the first episode of this podcast. 4:37:49 And I interviewed a guy whose name is Donald McIntyre, and he basically foretold that this moment would come. 4:37:56 He said, one day, maybe you're going to be smart enough and capable of debating the academic Paul Sztorc, who proposes Drivechains and has this crazy idea. 4:38:06 And it seems like, of course, we had an interview. 4:38:11 We did the first one two years ago, and then we did another one last month. 4:38:15 And now we're doing another, which turned out to be the longest. 4:38:20 My question for you right now is, why are you pushing harder now? 4:38:24 Because I remember two years ago when we were discussing, your attitude was a bit defeatist in the sense that you're basically like, maybe that somebody else will be able to take my ideas and push them harder. 4:38:36 Now you decided last year to create a company and try to push Drivechains as a solution for scaling. 4:38:45 Why now? Why now when the culture is different, when some people cheer for ossification, when Michael Saylor doesn't like privacy, when you have the cyber hornets? 4:38:56 These are the reasons, though, it's because I think that actually the the cult and it like people are just people really are, are worse, like, you know, like, I remember, like talking to Giacomo Zucco in 2017. 4:39:15 And, you know, we're talking about like physics and stuff really seemed like a smart guy, but now and it's still his meme craft is pretty good. 4:39:26 But yeah, like, so one of the things is I learned more about lightning, and that I learned that is probably dead and technically, completely. 4:39:34 And that not only that, but most of the experts also agree with that, and they just go along with it to kind of collect money. 4:39:42 And it's kind of no different than what, you know, I like what some would say that the Federal Reserve does that with economics where they hire people and people are kind of like, 4:39:56 What is the point of all this? This is just we're just making reports about nothing. 4:40:02 But it's a big and so I kind of think that it's actually Bitcoin is already in danger of becoming useless and even replaced by something. 4:40:12 And I think that 4:40:15 Yeah, like not only it's like the elite people in lightning know, and then it was the thing that people wouldn't talk about. 4:40:23 So it's like the most important problem in any organization is the one that you're not allowed to talk about. 4:40:30 And then the now people are starting to talk about it a little. 4:40:36 And so I kind of think 4:40:38 I mean, just the other ideas are just so bad. 4:40:41 And we just everyone's people are lying to themselves so much. 4:40:44 And it's honestly, I think the whole community is going to suffer some kind of humiliation of one kind or another. 4:40:51 Like, why do people even care about Fediment, which is just 4:40:57 kind of everyone's just going to get rug pulled. 4:40:59 You know, like, like ARK is a good idea, but the liquidity and the complexity and it requires turns out it requires 119 or something else. 4:41:07 So when are we going to get that I've asked people at TAPCOMP, I asked various people for their opinion, advisory opinion, hey, what how wouldn't how quickly can we do the soft fork anyway? 4:41:18 The consensus answer is something like three years. 4:41:21 Because we schedule them like to be merged to like six months out, and then they don't activate for six months, at least, and there's nothing on the table. 4:41:30 So it would be many months of discussion first. 4:41:35 And so there's like, it's like a minimum two years and then plus another year because of just so three years. 4:41:44 And just think of, you know, what these things that people say are, they're just just listen to them. 4:41:51 You know, I don't know, like, some of it is unspeakable. 4:41:54 It's so absurd. 4:41:55 But like, yeah, certain things said by what you might think we call cultural leaders. 4:42:01 We'll just think of like people saying this is this idea of shitcoins on Bitcoin. 4:42:04 It's like, not as sure. 4:42:06 And then Michael Saylor told me we could put Zcash on like a layer three lightning supernode or something. 4:42:12 And I was like, what, you know, so it's kind of like, I think, you know, I think it's a good idea. 4:42:26 Like, what, you know, so it's kind of like, I think the right time to push now is because, like, very soon, it may be actually too late, the ossification people will win and then there will be another civil war. 4:42:52 Because the ossification, the premature ossification, KYC, US dollar, USDT over lightning, like the fact that Michael Saylor doesn't already realize that you can move US dollars over lightning. 4:43:10 And the fact that there's people put out, did Spiral or someone put out like a grant, like a 10 Bitcoin grant, or something, or one Bitcoin grant, or maybe a $1 grant, I don't even know. 4:43:23 But there's some big grant for like, if you can move US dollars over lightning, but I mean, whatever, plenty of people, including me, in 2013, and Arthur Hayes, plenty of people know how to do that. 4:43:37 Just call it synthetic, synthetic dollar. 4:43:40 So it's already possible. 4:43:42 So I think we have rotated in Bitcoin away from a culture that's dead into just rewarding people who go along with the predictable BS and punishing people who express any kind of critique or dissatisfaction. 4:44:12 It's very telling that the only way you could have, you have to produce something like, it has to be an idea as good as ARK from someone who was a Blockstream associate, like someone who had broken the lightning network before. 4:44:36 And it has to be really far away. 4:44:39 Years away. 4:44:44 Yeah, I think that, and then of course, the growth of Ethereum, you know, Ethereum has grown enormously. 4:44:51 The fact that Ethereum cares about users, where we have disdain and contempt for the users. 4:45:00 So, yeah, I think that it's not going to be like, you know, like, I honestly think the Visigoths are kind of at the gate, to some extent, and everyone just thinks, oh, Rome will never fall because the city has stood for 1000 years and whatever. 4:45:19 You know, I hope that I'm mistaken about that. 4:45:23 But yeah, I think something should be done to shake things up a little bit, especially a completely uncontroversial idea that is just counting to 13,000 on L1 that has no downsides is completely reversible. 4:45:37 It does not pose any risk or even change anything. 4:45:39 It's just the same mining dynamics that have always existed. 4:45:43 So it's all ridiculous. 4:45:45 Well, there's someone in the chat who says, is there a better threshold for miners to reduce dangerous Drivechains being created and incentivize better experiments? 4:45:55 Yes, it's in the 2016 presentation, that minor sidechain privatization. 4:46:00 That's when I had these thoughts and made slides and delivered a presentation that long ago. 4:46:06 They have an incentive naturally to maximize the market exchange rate of the coin. 4:46:11 That is the criterion. 4:46:15 If we don't pick that criterion, we're not going to be able to maximize the market exchange rate of the coin. 4:46:20 And that's why we're not going to be able to maximize the market exchange rate of the coin. 4:46:25 They have an incentive naturally to maximize the market exchange rate of the coin and the transaction fees. 4:46:33 That is the criterion. 4:46:37 If we don't pick that criterion. 4:46:40 Then we'll just be at a disadvantage. 4:46:49 Okay. 4:46:54 I'm still reading the comments. 4:46:56 There's a lot. 4:46:58 I'm still surprised that we are almost five hours into this interview. 4:47:02 Are they live comments? 4:47:04 Like people are still listening? 4:47:06 Yeah. 4:47:07 Okay, great. 4:47:08 It's incredible. 4:47:11 I mean, there are not too many people listening, but the ones that do listen seem to be very engaged in the conversation. 4:47:18 Okay, great. 4:47:20 Can we get through all the questions or good comments? 4:47:26 There is this... 4:47:28 I must have misread his name like three times. 4:47:30 So it's Sany C D R O C R. 4:47:34 Sany C Broker or whatever. 4:47:38 He keeps on arguing against Drivechains and he's fighting with Jay in the chat. 4:47:43 It will make sense if you... 4:47:45 So if you listen to this on Spotify, it makes no sense to you. 4:47:47 But if you check out the YouTube video afterwards, you're going to find everything. 4:47:55 Okay, great. 4:47:57 Let me find the comments. 4:48:03 Running a node that enforces strict consensus rules is literally being a gatekeeper. 4:48:09 There are careful incentives that need to be balanced and it's very easy to see them go wrong with slight changes. 4:48:16 As we have witnessed many times. 4:48:21 Is that a comment about BIP300 may change things? 4:48:25 Most likely. 4:48:30 Well, the... 4:48:34 Like, it'd be a big change if... 4:48:37 Like, what change do they have in mind? 4:48:41 Well, it seems like Garrett Byrne decided to step in and said, 4:48:46 could you discuss the minor activation thresholds for the new sidechains in a Drivechain world? 4:48:52 The Sanus guy seems confused. 4:49:00 That's too... 4:49:03 I mean, what do they want to know? 4:49:05 It's in the bit. 4:49:06 There's 90% to activate. 4:49:08 That's based off of previously. 4:49:12 It's a couple of things, but there was this used to be a bit nine activation and that was the precedent was 95% and then speedy trial was 90%. 4:49:22 We don't want a couple of people to be able to veto, but we do want all the miners to endorse the sidechain because the withdrawals are so minor centric. 4:49:32 We want the miners to give it a thumbs up. 4:49:35 First, miners pay no real cost to adding a sidechain, other than any indirect costs that they pay from the sidechain being bad. 4:49:46 So that is what gives them the incentive to only add the good sidechains. 4:49:50 But that's also what protects the 256 slots from just being spammed instantly and filled up. 4:49:58 So it's 90% over two weeks. 4:50:01 And then the withdrawal is basically a vote that is, you know, it's you need 51% yes to win. 4:50:10 But there's also you're allowed to vote if you're allowed to abstain and ignore completely. 4:50:16 You're also allowed to vote no and vote against. 4:50:19 And so the purpose for that is, as I've said, the sidechain itself will automatically generate the single hash that is correct. 4:50:31 And anything else was like made by hand from someone else. 4:50:36 So everyone knows what the one real hash is if they look. 4:50:41 The issue is that they don't need to look because it's the sidechain, it's optional to look and the sidechain software may be designed in a way that it sucks so much that no one can figure out what it is. 4:50:52 But my point is, it's either in any normal scenario, it's easy to find. 4:50:57 So there's only ever going to be a disagreement. 4:51:01 If someone is doing something that is objectively and easily objectively wrong and easily detected as wrong. 4:51:10 And that is why you can downvote and that was this is 26% veto because normally there should just be clear agreement on what to do. 4:51:18 If we delay if the vote fails, then it just the sidechain just starts over again and tries to put new people on the withdrawal queue is the resource everyone by fee and it's twice again. 4:51:31 So this does not harm those the withdraw people because those people are not lay people they have chosen intentionally to. 4:51:40 They have chosen intentionally to wait out the withdrawal process. 4:51:44 And if it fails, they can change cans again and sell to more patient people. 4:51:51 And so eventually it will. 4:51:54 The people owning it are the most patient and most optimistic about moving the coins through. 4:52:02 And as a result, they are the ones who are harmed the least by it being delayed by another three months. 4:52:08 Sanis argues that there are strong benefits for creating many failures and explain the disincentives for miners to create failed Drivechains. 4:52:20 Right, well, no one wants to create one that fails. 4:52:23 Oh, they think is he saying something like they'll make one that fails and then steal all the coins. 4:52:28 I don't know what he's saying. 4:52:29 He hasn't said this directly, but I'm sure that this is implied in his argument. 4:52:34 He hasn't said this directly, but I'm sure that this is implied in the statement. 4:52:39 There are strong benefits for creating many failures. 4:52:43 Well, I don't know. 4:52:44 I think that I would interpret that as talking about R&D. 4:52:47 Like we try if we only try if we only ever open a business that has a ninety nine percent chance of succeeding. 4:52:54 The economy would be terrible. 4:52:55 It would be like, you know, be a nightmare. 4:52:58 We need all the failures. 4:53:05 I can relate to this, but at the same time, does this not mean that people are going to lose their coins? 4:53:11 I know, but they intentionally choose. 4:53:14 They intentionally they get the feature if they it won't work like that. 4:53:19 In reality, it will be like people spin up a bunch of stuff. 4:53:23 People put twenty dollars in. 4:53:26 They see how they like it. 4:53:28 If they like it, they put more money. 4:53:29 So everyone will have everyone will be at their marginal point where they where they are OK with the risk. 4:53:35 You know what I mean? 4:53:36 It's not like they're going to. 4:53:38 No one is going to put their life savings on the sidechain on day one. 4:53:42 The people will only put coins on the sidechain to the extent that they are comfortable with the risk. 4:53:49 So this is why the miners can steal is the worst, worst possible argument against Drivechain. 4:53:56 And it's also the idea that we're giving miners more power. 4:53:59 It's ridiculous. 4:54:01 The user wants the feature. 4:54:06 No, no one. I don't think anyone will spin up a sidechain for like the purpose of saving storing the coins long term. 4:54:12 The L1 is already going to do that. 4:54:18 It's sad, sad to get a quick, sad to continue to get questions like that. 4:54:21 I do. I feel sad about that. 4:54:24 I feel like we could be moving the frontier further. 4:54:27 We could be working on prediction markets. 4:54:29 We could be working on, you know, zk-SNARK sidechain, privacy sidechain. 4:54:33 We could be working on different, you know, scaling with sidechains, various refinements, covenant sidechain. 4:54:42 And instead, we're talking about whether or not the user owns their own money or not in Bitcoin, which is, I think, just a disgrace. 4:54:51 OK. 4:54:55 So, Paul, so far, what is your progress? 4:54:58 How do you see the debate advancing? 4:55:02 Obviously, you're not happy about the questions that you're getting, but you have been talking with developers. 4:55:08 I get the questions that I get, you know. 4:55:11 Do you think that you're making any progress based on the interactions that you had at TabConf with actual developers? 4:55:17 Yes. 4:55:19 And it seems it must be the case, because if we're really in a situation where, like, Ben Ark only heard about it, like, two days ago, and now it's being discussed on stage, like. 4:55:31 And now it seems like people are still talking about it all the time. 4:55:33 So we're still talking about it. 4:55:35 So. 4:55:37 And the counter arguments against it are so bad. 4:55:40 And the counter arguments against it are so bad. 4:55:46 It really boiled down to we don't like it when miners make more money and we don't like it when the user. 4:55:54 When the user uses freedom. 4:55:58 That's literally what it boils down to. 4:56:00 I guess. 4:56:01 But it's still interesting that you interacted with some of the brightest minds at TabConf, and you had to deal with Bitcoin Core developers, with lots of contributors to this space. 4:56:14 And maybe that it's not fair to ask of you to share some private conversations. 4:56:19 But what was the reception like? 4:56:21 Oh, well, you know, it was a there was a little bit of interest in electricity. 4:56:26 Many of these people I've known for many, many years. 4:56:29 So I think it was interesting. 4:56:33 The debate, I think, you know, it had it was like the main event, I think. 4:56:37 And it had everyone's attention. 4:56:38 So that's a that's obviously progress of a kind. 4:56:42 I really think a lot of people were kind of scratching their heads and kind of confused. 4:56:45 Which is which is too bad. 4:56:46 But also, maybe it's just a sign that it's very new and very different. 4:56:51 I think a lot of people were openly speaking for the first time, whispering what, you know, they said the choir part out loud about lightning not being the way to go. 4:57:02 So that is, again, showing that. 4:57:04 You know, people are their minds are opening. 4:57:10 And I think, well, plenty of people came up to me after the debate and they said, thanks so much for doing this. 4:57:17 I don't really understand what's going on, but I am really interested. 4:57:20 And and then a couple of people did come up to me afterwards. 4:57:24 And they were like, I completely get it, a hundred percent now. 4:57:25 I get why it's a good idea. 4:57:27 I get why it's an unpopular idea. 4:57:30 So I had so I had a couple of those, you know, I had like five or six of those. 4:57:34 So those are worth a lot because one person who really gets it is obviously worth like 500 people who haven't read the bit, and they don't. 4:57:47 You know, they're like I haven't read the book yet, but thank you for giving me the time to have a look at it. 4:57:51 But it's like, that's not a real thought. 4:57:54 You know what I mean? 4:57:57 I know exactly what you mean. 4:57:58 And another comment that I want to make about the current culture, because we were, I guess, riffing around that, is that there seems to be this moral of being Bitcoin only, even at the expense of being pro-state and KYC friendly. 4:58:16 And we got to this point where it's more ethical to only buy Bitcoin from SWAN or whatever. 4:58:22 I'm not endorsing them. 4:58:23 I'm not saying you should not use them. 4:58:24 I don't care. 4:58:25 Just buy your Bitcoin wherever you want. 4:58:27 But they don't care that they're being KYC because they are buying from a service that demands nothing. 4:58:36 Sorry. 4:58:37 They are buying from a service that asks for all of their data. 4:58:40 And doesn't have any shit coins. 4:58:42 And they do have an issue with ATMs, for example. 4:58:45 And they say, no, I'm not going to buy from a non-KYC ATM or whatever, because it also has Litecoin and Ethereum. 4:58:52 And that service is obviously not pure. 4:58:55 Obviously, it's a very flawed argument. 4:58:59 And it also transpires in the situation with hardware wallets, where Trezor has been around for the longest time, for almost 10 years now. 4:59:09 And they have developed and hardened their security. 4:59:12 And they have this open source solution. 4:59:14 And people say, no, that's awful because it has shit coins on it. 4:59:17 Let me buy this new and flashy device, which is Bitcoin only. 4:59:22 Because, obviously, the argument that they present is that the attack surface is lower if you only have one coin on it, which is really dumb. 4:59:30 They obviously haven't read BIP44, which is also being used to run the testnet on the same hardware wallets. 4:59:38 Very, very, very many, many, very many wallets use BIP44. 4:59:44 So, yeah. 4:59:45 I think that's it. 4:59:46 Thank you. 4:59:47 Bye. 4:59:48 Bye. 4:59:49 Bye. 4:59:50 Yeah, my point is that the culture has got to a point where it's moral to be Bitcoin only, but it's also super compliant to be Bitcoin only. 5:00:01 And we're not really the defined ones. 5:00:05 We're not really breaking rules anymore. 5:00:08 It seems like even the coin joins, which are this collaborative idea where you and I join our coins together to have equal outputs. 5:00:17 Even that one ends up being frowned upon. 5:00:20 Blockchain analysis has become part of the norm, which it should not. 5:00:25 There are businesses. 5:00:26 I don't think there is a KYC exchange that doesn't employ some sort of blockchain analysis service at this point. 5:00:33 And it has become normalized. 5:00:36 And where I'm getting with this is that I think my favorite possible use case with Drivechains is, for example, I do a base layer coin join. 5:00:47 I'm going to have equal outputs with everyone else, and then I'm going to get on a Zcash or a Monero sidechain. 5:00:55 And that's the perfect fungibility that I want for myself and other people to use where you can't really discriminate or distinguish between outputs. 5:01:04 That's the kind of sound money that we should be having in our transactions. 5:01:10 But I can also see how this can be concern trolled into not ever manifesting, not ever coming into existence. 5:01:18 By the way, we crossed the five hour mark. 5:01:21 It's incredible. 5:01:23 And I can also see how this can be used by criminals. 5:01:27 But then again, this has been the narrative against Bitcoin since day one, since people started funding Wikileaks with Bitcoin. 5:01:37 It has been like this. 5:01:40 Well, yeah, there was an argument that said we don't endorse crime. 5:01:46 And well, there was, of course, there are always people who are like literal anarchists who are like more crime, the better. 5:01:53 But I think I'm more of a centrist, but educated, enlightened Bitcoin view. 5:02:02 When something like this, it said Bitcoin must be used in the dark. 5:02:07 Bitcoin can be used for dark, like on darkened markets and in all the kinds of other black markets and things. 5:02:15 So it had all kinds of special use cases for like tax evasion, evading other things, you know, buying buying illegal drugs, et cetera. 5:02:27 So the argument was Bitcoin can be used for that, but credit cards and other stuff can't. 5:02:35 But Bitcoin can also be used for every white market thing. 5:02:41 And so it's just a matter of time before Bitcoin takes over. 5:02:45 So a number go up, therefore. 5:02:47 And, yeah, I think that was pretty logical, and I think that that is also why the it's, you know, it's just a pure statement of a fact that if the coin does not capture the, you know, the black market, it will it will lose and it will go to zero or will go become an NFT. 5:03:18 So that was an old argument, very old. 5:03:21 That was like an ancient Bitcoin, like 2011 argument. 5:03:24 And then Bitcoin Uncensored also would repeat it. 5:03:27 They would say, you know, the whole point of. 5:03:30 It was a joke about this Bitcoin do AML, and then the joke was it does ML. 5:03:38 You know, like so that was a joke, but had a grain of truth, which is that. 5:03:44 These use cases are kind of just the key to victory and had nothing really to do with. 5:03:51 What it meant was that the other use cases of money were constrained as a medium of exchange, and that there were these customers, the underserved, you know, there were these customers who that the credit card companies couldn't touch. 5:04:03 So you had this captive market. 5:04:06 See, it's just a pure matter of strategy. 5:04:08 And so the idea was, if you if you didn't do that, you you were you or we would be dead, the project would be dead if Bitcoin weren't subversive, it will just end up competing with Visa and then it will just get replaced. 5:04:28 Visa and then it will just get replaced. 5:04:34 I get that point, but the value proposition of Bitcoin was never to be like Visa, you know, I mean, you can misinterpret the the white paper and be dogmatic about Internet commerce, which was the pitch that Satoshi presented. 5:04:50 But how is this different from Visa? 5:04:52 It's decentralized. 5:04:53 It's supposed to resist censorship. 5:04:56 It's supposed to matter if it's because you as a human being are centralized in one point in space and time, and it's it doesn't matter if, you know, if it's like if your privacy is erased, they'll know who you are and they won't. 5:05:12 So that's a good point. 5:05:15 I did argue with someone on Twitter who said, I don't care if my Bitcoin is being KYC because nobody can prevent me from transacting. 5:05:24 And I'm like, of course, they cannot stop the on-chain transaction itself, but they can stop you. 5:05:30 You know, right. 5:05:32 Is that Bitcoin worth anything if you can't use it? 5:05:35 Right, well, the old argument would say, no, it would say it doesn't matter what it costs, the subversive thing is the only the only vote that matters and everything else will just take care of itself. 5:05:53 And partly the whole SegWit2x thing was like, we can't let these corporations are the centralized ones, they have a mailing address. 5:06:02 We can't give them their way because it's a dead end. 5:06:05 So that's what I'm that's what I mean now when I say that these people, the large blockers today are the people who, you know, the custodial lightning people and the. 5:06:15 The, you know, the compliance people, like you say, they are the large blockers, which is kind of ironic, right, because they would never even believe that they are, but, you know, that's part of it. 5:06:27 I was going to ask you this earlier, but do you ever think about uniting the Bitcoin community as a whole, because there was this schism, this split in 2017, and there was this new chain that was created and then it got forked multiple times because people tend to disagree. 5:06:47 Do you think that Drivechains would bring back the big blockers to Bitcoin? 5:06:51 I don't know. I, in a way, I think you had to wait to do this project until they had completely lost hope. 5:06:59 So, but I definitely think, you know, as this project has got momentum and also weirdly, as it's been criticized by people who don't know anything, it, you know, it has caught the attention of some of those people and they are now interested in the project. 5:07:22 And they're thinking, they raised their head a little bit and they think, like, what is, they think, like, what is, like, what is going on here that small blockers hate so much or something? 5:07:43 It's funny because they really were on the losing end, even in the sidechain Drivechain paradigm. 5:07:50 The layer one, the small blockers get everything they want. 5:07:56 They just have this counter that counts to 13,000, but that's no different really than check, lock, time, verify, or many other things that it does, just like counting the block height. 5:08:04 So the small blockers get off, we get everything they want. 5:08:08 The fact that many people today don't realize that speaks 100% to, you know, their own stupidity and their lack of virtue and other ways. 5:08:18 So there's misinformation on the issue. 5:08:22 So the small blockers get everything they want. 5:08:24 The large blockers are the ones who have to deal with the possibility that miners will steal from them. 5:08:29 So I don't know if they would switch from L1, BCH, BSV, whatever, back to L2 of BTC. 5:08:37 But I asked a few of them and some of them, you know, because some of them come to the spaces or something. 5:08:42 And so some of them seem to indicate that they might, which I think would be good. 5:08:47 And it has nothing to do with just uniting small blockers and large blockers. 5:08:52 It is uniting everyone into one team that will defeat everyone else. 5:09:00 So that's the key. 5:09:01 That's very important because Metcalfe's law, because of, you know, network effects, you know, strength in numbers. 5:09:13 So basically, Paul, I want to say that I'm super proud of you. 5:09:20 You were able to take part in this discussion for five hours and you're more engaged than I was. 5:09:27 And you don't seem as tired as I am. 5:09:29 It's 3 a.m. here. 5:09:31 It's past my bedtime. 5:09:33 But basically, you were able to participate in this debate for so long. 5:09:39 And I didn't always like your analogies, but I think as we kept talking, I think past the two hour point, there was a switch where you basically turned off your bad analogy thoughts or something and you got better. 5:09:57 I'm going to talk with my guy who does short clips to cut some parts from this and maybe make a highlight video. 5:10:05 I'm sure that I'm going to cut that part where you comment on the panel because it's entertaining and people are going to enjoy watching that. 5:10:14 Also, you have a bladder that must be very large if you didn't need a toilet break. 5:10:20 I know that basically we did this after you had lunch and you didn't ask for any kind of break, which is admirable. 5:10:28 So even if I was on the other side of the camp and I disagree with you 99 percent on Drivechains, I would still respect you. 5:10:38 But I think I agree with you on about 70, 80 percent of the points. 5:10:42 And I respect you also. 5:10:44 So congratulations for lasting so long. 5:10:47 And thanks to everyone who has been around. 5:10:50 There are still 12 people watching this right now, which is incredible. 5:10:54 If you ask me, 80 people watched it in total during our stream and 12 are still around. 5:11:01 It's admirable. Maybe that they're all LayerTwo Labs employees. 5:11:05 I don't know. There is no way to verify. 5:11:08 How many employees do you have anyway? 5:11:11 Now we have like something like six tech, eight non-tech other things. 5:11:19 And thanks, everyone, in the chat, if you want to some so someone asked if I have a merch store or whatever, you can get the Bitcoin Takeover magazine on. 5:11:32 So if you're from the US, get it from ellenbits.com. 5:11:35 They have a very nice store and Ben Ark is a supporter of Drivechains, so maybe support him, too. 5:11:42 They're selling it for about 10 bucks plus shipping. 5:11:44 If you want to get a copy. 5:11:45 If you're from Europe, which is unlikely at this late hour, but still possible, you can get it from shopinbit.com and it's a special edition which has a golden plating on the cover and stuff like that. 5:11:57 It's also fancier and more expensive, but that's a good way in which you can get acquainted with my work and also support me and whatever. 5:12:05 You can also send me a donation, but it's less. 5:12:08 I mean, I like money, but it's more satisfying when I know that you're reading my work. 5:12:12 So thank you, Paul. 5:12:12 I hope you also read my magazine, at least partially. 5:12:16 It was great. 5:12:19 I mean, it's great. 5:12:21 It's cool. 5:12:21 It's like a, you know, it's a very different thing than. 5:12:26 It's a very thick pages and stuff, and it's just fun. 5:12:28 You know, it's like a magazine, like from an earlier era, and it's cool. 5:12:32 And I put it in my bookshelf with all my Bitcoin stuff. 5:12:34 I have lots of cool Bitcoin stuff. 5:12:36 Thank you. 5:12:36 I'm going to make a book out of it because it seems like Bitcoiners don't really respect magazines and they respect books, and it's going to be the same content, but in a book. 5:12:45 And I spoke with a publisher. 5:12:46 It's a huge book with big pages. 5:12:48 Yeah, I think that'd be great. 5:12:49 Like, it'd be like a coffee table book. 5:12:52 Yeah, people are going to show it off. 5:12:54 I hope I outsell Sepadine, but it's unlikely. 5:12:58 I don't know. 5:12:58 I don't know. 5:12:59 I don't know. 5:12:59 I don't know. 5:13:00 I don't know. 5:13:00 I don't know. 5:13:00 I don't know. 5:13:01 I don't know. 5:13:01 I don't know. 5:13:01 I don't know. 5:13:01 I don't know. 5:13:02 I don't know. 5:13:02 I don't know. 5:13:02 I don't know. 5:13:02 Sepadine, but it's unlikely. 5:13:05 I don't know how much he sold. 5:13:07 Oh, he sold a lot, like even I think at one point someone wanted to lobby to Congress and they bought a copy of the Bitcoin standard for every Congress person. 5:13:20 That's only 500 ish. 5:13:21 That's still a lot, you know. 5:13:25 I'm not sure if anyone actually read it, but anyway, if I was to do another interview with you. 5:13:33 There are still some rabbit holes to explore. 5:13:36 I would read out loud the bips for everyone who's too lazy to read them and comment on them. 5:13:44 I guess that would be an approach, but that can take two hours or more. 5:13:49 I would also try to listen to, for example, there was the podcast by Eric Rodermore, not Eric. 5:13:56 What's his name? 5:13:58 Casey. 5:13:58 Casey Rodermore. 5:14:00 Hell Money podcast. 5:14:01 He did a breakdown on his opinion on Drivechains. 5:14:05 I think it would be cool if we got him to debate you, Paul. 5:14:09 But even if he did not, it's still interesting to listen to that. 5:14:12 So maybe that can be another episode if you're down to it. 5:14:16 And it seems like there's also a Shinobi interview, but I'm not sure if he presented anything that he hasn't written in his article. 5:14:24 Maybe it's better to wait for him to come up with something new before we dive into that. 5:14:30 But yeah, I just presented part of this whole exploration of Drivechains because I think they're a big deal. 5:14:39 And as much as some people try to minimize it and say that it's shit coins and they don't actually read it, it's still interesting. 5:14:48 And right now, the best shot that we have to onboard 8 billion people tomorrow, as opposed to using custodians or using shit coins for that. 5:15:00 Maybe that in the future, we're going to come up with better scaling technology. 5:15:04 So far, this is the best we got. 5:15:10 Oh, thanks. 5:15:11 Any closing remark? 5:15:12 Because I'm done. 5:15:14 No, I think you should go to sleep. 5:15:16 You need your beauty sleep. 5:15:19 Vlad, if you're ever going to land that, that super cycle. 5:15:24 Yeah, but, you know, the super girlfriends understand and they don't care if I look like hell and I have wrinkles around my eyes, that's the grind that it takes to get the supra. 5:15:34 And in case you're not aware, the supra cycle means that in the next couple of years, one Bitcoin is going to equal one Toyota Supra and one Toyota Supra is going to equal one girlfriend. 5:15:45 And basically, we're going to get Supras and then we're going to have fun and the institutions are going to rage quit because we dumped on them and then we're going to buy the dip and we're going to perpetuate the supra cycle and it makes much more sense than stuck to flow, which is bullshit. 5:16:04 It was just something that was made up by the bankers and the institutions to make you huddle until unexpected high, which never came. 5:16:12 And then they dumped on you and now you're a bag holder. 5:16:15 At least do something with your life. 5:16:17 Get a girlfriend. 5:16:18 And that's my closing remark. 5:16:20 Thank you, Paul. 5:16:22 Thank you, Vlad.