1 00:00:00,952 --> 00:00:08,152 Hello and welcome to Drivechain Talk. Today is March 16th. We're going to talk about Drivechain 2 00:00:08,152 --> 00:00:17,832 as we always do. Everyone is welcome to come on up to the stage and share thoughts and comments, 3 00:00:17,832 --> 00:00:28,072 questions about Drivechain. Drivechain is BIPS 300 and 301, a transformative 4 00:00:28,072 --> 00:00:35,111 crypto-economic upgrade for Bitcoin, enabling peer-to-peer, two-way pegged 5 00:00:35,832 --> 00:00:45,751 sidechains on Bitcoin, fulfilling the sidechain vision of a more ossified layer one and a more 6 00:00:45,751 --> 00:00:55,591 extensible platform for Bitcoin to express the creativity and innovation its community is 7 00:00:55,591 --> 00:01:09,032 capable of. Innovation for privacy, for scaling, for peer-to-peer oracles, for assets on blockchain, 8 00:01:11,352 --> 00:01:16,871 and more, including DNS, Satoshi's own non-monetary 9 00:01:17,432 --> 00:01:23,752 blockchain application that was discussed in the BitDNS thread 10 00:01:25,672 --> 00:01:31,992 back in August of 2010, quite a long time ago in Bitcoin years. 11 00:01:34,231 --> 00:01:42,472 Well, I'm Henry of LayerTwo Labs and this should be another great conversation. As we have people join, 12 00:01:42,551 --> 00:01:48,231 we'll get questions and comments on Drivechain, sometimes critical and skeptical, sometimes 13 00:01:48,231 --> 00:01:56,231 enthusiastic and impatient. Drivechain is an idea that's been around for about seven years. 14 00:01:56,231 --> 00:02:05,191 It was first conceived in 2015 at a time when the sidechain vision for Bitcoin was 15 00:02:05,992 --> 00:02:11,431 on the forefront of the imagination and expectations of the Bitcoin community. 16 00:02:12,392 --> 00:02:19,591 Since then, there's been a fascinating and complicated evolution of ideas, which have led to 17 00:02:19,591 --> 00:02:27,591 sidechains being put on the back burner a little bit. But now there's an opportunity with greater 18 00:02:27,591 --> 00:02:32,871 understanding in the community and a greater sense of urgency among some. 19 00:02:32,871 --> 00:02:38,392 For sidechains to once again be at the forefront of our thoughts and our efforts. 20 00:02:40,472 --> 00:02:50,951 Sidechains are potentially an untapped opportunity for value creation and the acceleration 21 00:02:50,951 --> 00:03:00,151 of Bitcoinization. This untapped opportunity could be enormous. We won't know unless we 22 00:03:00,791 --> 00:03:05,752 enable peer-to-peer, two-way pegged sidechains, and then we'll find out. 23 00:03:07,351 --> 00:03:14,312 Some people who are bullish on Drivechain imagine that in the far future, perhaps about 10 years 24 00:03:14,312 --> 00:03:26,151 from now, maybe as much as half of the miner income could be coming from the fees collected 25 00:03:26,711 --> 00:03:30,472 the fees collected from the merged mine sidechains. 26 00:03:31,912 --> 00:03:40,951 This could be transformative for Bitcoin's network security and the mining industry. 27 00:03:43,351 --> 00:03:48,791 So a lot of people's lives will be different if Drivechain is very successful. 28 00:03:50,632 --> 00:03:55,511 And if Drivechain isn't adopted, the future course for Bitcoin's growth could be very 29 00:03:55,511 --> 00:04:02,552 different than it otherwise would be. Since we can't run an experiment, we can't have 30 00:04:02,552 --> 00:04:06,392 two possible worlds, one where we do Drivechain and one where we don't. 31 00:04:07,832 --> 00:04:13,912 We have to use theory and imagination to understand the consequences of its adoption 32 00:04:13,912 --> 00:04:19,831 or non-adoption. That is, if we do Drivechain, what will happen to Bitcoin? And if we don't 33 00:04:19,831 --> 00:04:25,991 do Drivechain, what will happen to Bitcoin? We have to use theory and imagination to understand 34 00:04:25,991 --> 00:04:32,711 that. And we draw on the data we have available and all the information we have from observing 35 00:04:32,711 --> 00:04:44,391 other blockchains that are adopting more extensibility. Everyone who's joined is 36 00:04:44,391 --> 00:04:51,111 welcome to raise their hand and come on up to the stage if you'd like, ask a question, 37 00:04:51,111 --> 00:04:57,671 share a comment. I see some familiar faces in the audience. Please come on up and chat with me if 38 00:04:57,671 --> 00:05:05,431 you'd like. That would be awesome. It's really great for me as a Drivechain enthusiast to hear 39 00:05:05,431 --> 00:05:13,591 people's thoughts and opinions about it. As one becomes more and more familiar with the ideas of 40 00:05:13,591 --> 00:05:19,591 the critics and skeptics and the best ways to answer them, one becomes a better Drivechain 41 00:05:20,232 --> 00:05:31,591 thinker. So I always welcome the opportunity to hear from people, whether they're a fan or whether 42 00:05:31,591 --> 00:05:38,391 they have a critical question. Welcome to the stage, Satoshi and Joyer. What's up, man? How's 43 00:05:38,391 --> 00:05:43,431 it going? Hey, thanks for having me up. Thank God everything is good. How are you doing? 44 00:05:44,711 --> 00:05:50,871 I'm great. I've got my cup of coffee and I'm ready to gear up for another hour and a half, 45 00:05:50,871 --> 00:05:58,711 as usual, of Drivechain focused conversation. This is really my calling. I got into this 46 00:05:59,752 --> 00:06:05,671 around a year and a half ago. And ever since then, it's just been more and more Drivechain. 47 00:06:06,151 --> 00:06:14,551 And now I have the opportunity to even interact directly sometimes with my boss, 48 00:06:14,551 --> 00:06:19,671 Paul Sztorc, and his collaborator, CryptAxe, and other people who are kind of fundamental in this 49 00:06:19,671 --> 00:06:27,831 project. So I'm thrilled to spread that energy to other people because I genuinely feel this is an 50 00:06:27,831 --> 00:06:35,431 enormous opportunity. This is a scientific-based movement to unlock value for Bitcoin. It's like 51 00:06:36,151 --> 00:06:41,192 the biggest thing in the history of the world. I know that's crazy to say, but to me personally, 52 00:06:41,192 --> 00:06:48,711 it's huge because there's a non-zero chance that this could be huge. This could be one of the most 53 00:06:48,711 --> 00:06:56,151 important things in the history of crypto. This is an upgrade for Bitcoin, which if it is done, 54 00:06:56,151 --> 00:07:03,752 and then if it is very successful, it could be massively important for the future course 55 00:07:03,752 --> 00:07:11,192 of Bitcoin and the success of the entire Cypherpunk project. Because what happens here is, 56 00:07:11,192 --> 00:07:16,792 let's say Bitcoin doesn't do Drivechain, and then Bitcoin is flipped by Ethereum, 57 00:07:16,792 --> 00:07:23,591 and the whole crypto movement is fragmented into an ever-increasing amount of different 58 00:07:23,591 --> 00:07:28,792 competing cryptocurrencies. There's no unity throughout the community. All the competing 59 00:07:28,792 --> 00:07:36,472 cryptocurrencies compete for monetary premium and for political acceptance. So instead of a 60 00:07:36,472 --> 00:07:45,512 unified voice, the whole movement of peer-to-peer digital asset networks are split up into fragments, 61 00:07:45,512 --> 00:07:54,391 balkanized, and that means that they're all weakened with respect to their ability to, 62 00:07:54,391 --> 00:08:02,072 as a unified community, promote their agenda for economic individualism and self-sovereignty and 63 00:08:02,072 --> 00:08:10,551 monetary and high-quality money. But that's the bad future. The good future, as I see it, 64 00:08:11,512 --> 00:08:20,551 is Drivechain is adopted, and then one by one, the altcoin users leave their altcoins, devaluing 65 00:08:20,551 --> 00:08:27,271 them towards zero, and Bitcoin appreciates as people migrate into the Bitcoin sidechains that 66 00:08:27,271 --> 00:08:35,431 are peer-to-peer because of Drivechain. And then the value of Bitcoin is rising, the user numbers 67 00:08:35,431 --> 00:08:42,712 of Bitcoin is rising, and Bitcoin layer one is ossifying because the sidechains are peer-to-peer 68 00:08:42,712 --> 00:08:49,592 and multitudinous and highly expressive, enabling fewer or no changes on layer one, 69 00:08:49,592 --> 00:08:56,152 enabling Bitcoin's narratives to strengthen. And at the same time, Bitcoin's potential as 70 00:08:56,152 --> 00:09:03,592 a platform for expressive new technology is increased. So it unifies the entire crypto 71 00:09:03,592 --> 00:09:08,392 community, potentially. We could bring in all the altcoiners back to Bitcoin. 72 00:09:09,991 --> 00:09:14,551 Those who left Bitcoin and those who've never been in Bitcoin could come back to Bitcoin entirely, 73 00:09:15,351 --> 00:09:21,752 and then the entire crypto community would be on Bitcoin on a solid and reliable foundation 74 00:09:23,192 --> 00:09:28,392 using layer twos, using sidechains. And then they're all sharing hash rate, 75 00:09:28,392 --> 00:09:33,752 they're all paying to the same miners their fees. So it's a collaborative, synergistic, 76 00:09:34,471 --> 00:09:43,031 mutually beneficial, capitalistic program. And the entire crypto community could then 77 00:09:43,031 --> 00:09:50,231 support Bitcoin globally to facilitate the political and economic establishment of Bitcoinization. 78 00:09:51,192 --> 00:09:56,952 And then we have success. We have instituted sound money and the sovereign individual, 79 00:09:57,512 --> 00:10:04,231 expressive cypherpunk movement of cryptographically secured information and communication and 80 00:10:04,231 --> 00:10:13,111 economic activity on the blockchain, on the internet. The whole thing is just so awesome. 81 00:10:13,111 --> 00:10:19,031 So I think the drivechain really could be huge when conceived in that best case scenario. 82 00:10:20,471 --> 00:10:24,551 And I think there's a chance of all that playing out that way. Some chance. 83 00:10:27,111 --> 00:10:33,192 Yeah, I share the vision. But I have a few points from last time we were talking, 84 00:10:33,991 --> 00:10:39,111 and I had some more time to think about. And I think that it's fair that there 85 00:10:39,111 --> 00:10:44,952 is some criticism as far as economic incentive for concentration of hash rate 86 00:10:45,911 --> 00:10:52,632 that could still be explored. What can be the negative downsides to 87 00:10:53,671 --> 00:11:00,551 hash rate being concentrated? But also I wanted to bring up that somebody showed me this, 88 00:11:00,551 --> 00:11:07,991 I sent you a DM as well, about a potential way to do drivechains without doing a soft fork. 89 00:11:08,952 --> 00:11:15,192 I'm not sure I fully understand how the two-way peg works over here without doing the soft forks, 90 00:11:15,192 --> 00:11:19,752 but I thought it'd be interesting to share that with you because maybe you would understand it 91 00:11:19,752 --> 00:11:20,252 better. 92 00:11:25,111 --> 00:11:30,712 That hand crank idea, I think, is from SuperTestNet, who is a drivechain supporter 93 00:11:31,592 --> 00:11:39,911 and frequent guest here at drivechain Twitter spaces. We could ping him into the room. 94 00:11:41,031 --> 00:11:41,832 I'll do that now. 95 00:11:43,752 --> 00:11:49,272 Okay, yeah. He's also sometimes in the Ordinal's Discord in the VC, 96 00:11:49,272 --> 00:11:53,592 but I haven't had a chance to really ask him about the details of that. 97 00:11:54,231 --> 00:12:00,392 Yeah. Yeah, he's such a great speaker, especially when there isn't any background noise. 98 00:12:01,592 --> 00:12:06,152 And maybe he'll join. I pinged him, so I hope he joins. 99 00:12:06,152 --> 00:12:06,652 Cool. 100 00:12:06,712 --> 00:12:14,871 SuperTestNet is awesome. He's really great. He so obviously has a very strong 101 00:12:14,871 --> 00:12:23,351 very strong professional software engineer developer level understanding of how Bitcoin 102 00:12:23,351 --> 00:12:34,871 works. And he personally creates software that interacts with or is closely related to Bitcoin, 103 00:12:34,871 --> 00:12:42,152 like this hand crank drivechain imitation idea, which is really awesome. 104 00:12:43,031 --> 00:12:51,431 I recall when SuperTestNet wrote an article on Stacker News called common, or he called it like 105 00:12:51,431 --> 00:12:57,991 a response to drivechain objections, or it was something very similar to that. In other words, 106 00:12:57,991 --> 00:13:07,031 an article responding to frequent objections to drivechain. And Paul read it and said it 107 00:13:07,031 --> 00:13:13,671 was excellent. So that's one data point on SuperTestNet's output. 108 00:13:14,471 --> 00:13:16,871 Oh, nice. I found it. I'm going to have a read for that. 109 00:13:18,072 --> 00:13:18,572 Cool. 110 00:13:19,111 --> 00:13:27,431 But I want to ask you, do you see any downsides to miner concentration? And whether it be either 111 00:13:27,431 --> 00:13:34,871 geographic or even like in a pool? Because it's commonly talked about that it's a bad idea for a 112 00:13:34,871 --> 00:13:41,272 pool to own a lot of the hashrate or for a small amount of pools to own a lot of the hashrate. 113 00:13:41,911 --> 00:13:46,952 Do you see a potential issue where there's an economic incentive for 114 00:13:48,712 --> 00:13:52,952 concentration of hashrate due to drivechains? 115 00:13:52,952 --> 00:14:02,312 No. I think that all of the people who talk about miner concentration or 116 00:14:03,832 --> 00:14:07,911 miner centralization have an incoherent 117 00:14:10,952 --> 00:14:15,031 framework of ideas with respect to that topic. 118 00:14:15,991 --> 00:14:25,592 And since the beginning of Bitcoin, it was understood by Satoshi that—not to say he was 119 00:14:25,592 --> 00:14:30,871 perfect. He makes mistakes just like everyone else. But I just referenced that it's been long 120 00:14:30,871 --> 00:14:41,111 established in Bitcoin that the mining industry for Bitcoin would evolve over time. 121 00:14:41,752 --> 00:14:48,231 The mining industry for Bitcoin would evolve over time. At one point, it was one CPU, 122 00:14:48,231 --> 00:14:54,712 one vote, meaning like everyone had their own computer and everyone would mine if they wanted 123 00:14:54,712 --> 00:15:01,832 to. And you could just click a button and you would start generating coins with your own machine, 124 00:15:01,832 --> 00:15:08,952 your consumer hardware. But Satoshi knew that server farms would spring up and then 125 00:15:09,752 --> 00:15:15,031 it wouldn't be economical to try to mine on your own computer anymore. You wouldn't have 126 00:15:15,031 --> 00:15:20,871 sufficient hashrate and you wouldn't have as cheap electricity as the industrial players. 127 00:15:22,072 --> 00:15:26,871 So Satoshi used that phrase server farms when talking about the future of Bitcoin mining. 128 00:15:28,471 --> 00:15:34,312 And he was right. Today, we have companies that spend tens of millions of dollars to create 129 00:15:34,312 --> 00:15:39,752 facilities that are dedicated to Bitcoin mining. The professionalization and specialization in the 130 00:15:39,752 --> 00:15:51,111 industry is a natural result of the competitive market forces. When one miner— 131 00:15:51,832 --> 00:15:57,991 It comes back down to that there's already economic incentive for the hashrate to be 132 00:15:57,991 --> 00:16:05,111 concentrated because of just the nature of how it works. So to say that drivechains might 133 00:16:05,991 --> 00:16:12,632 push that wouldn't make sense because naturally that's the inevitable future anyways. It has 134 00:16:12,632 --> 00:16:18,312 nothing to do with even drivechains. That's basically the refute to that. 135 00:16:19,512 --> 00:16:25,592 Yeah. The people who don't like drivechain because of the miner concentration issue, 136 00:16:26,392 --> 00:16:33,351 what they really don't like is not sidechains specifically in my view. What they actually don't 137 00:16:33,351 --> 00:16:38,952 like is merged mining generally, which is distinct from drivechain because merged mining already 138 00:16:38,952 --> 00:16:49,991 exists on Bitcoin. Every month, around three Bitcoin are paid to the Bitcoin miners that are 139 00:16:49,991 --> 00:16:58,152 merged mining Rootstock, for example, which is the largest of the merged mined sidechains and 140 00:16:58,152 --> 00:17:04,312 probably is the largest merged mined blockchain. I say that because there are merged mined side 141 00:17:04,312 --> 00:17:09,832 chains and there are merged mined altcoins. In fact, there were merged mined altcoins on Bitcoin 142 00:17:09,832 --> 00:17:15,671 before there were merged mined sidechains, as I understand. I say as I understand because I'm a 143 00:17:15,671 --> 00:17:23,271 lawyer and I try to be careful and I'm not a expert. I haven't devoted my entire life to 144 00:17:24,151 --> 00:17:29,031 following Bitcoin from day one. So there are things that I could say something and then 10 years from 145 00:17:29,031 --> 00:17:35,352 now, when I've learned more, I'll realize that it wasn't exactly right. So I try to be humble in the 146 00:17:35,352 --> 00:17:44,232 way I articulate things. I just point that out. So BitDNS was the discussion, was the topic of 147 00:17:44,232 --> 00:17:49,192 discussion for Satoshi and his contacts on the forum long ago in August 2010. And that was a 148 00:17:49,192 --> 00:17:55,911 merged mined altcoin that later was called Namecoin. And it's existed for a long time and now 149 00:17:55,911 --> 00:18:02,872 has, I think, quite small utilization. Its heyday was years ago. And for one reason or another, 150 00:18:03,431 --> 00:18:08,952 DNS on blockchain hasn't yet been enormously successful with respect to Bitcoin. 151 00:18:09,751 --> 00:18:19,592 And the one thing that has gained more adoption would be Rootstock, which is the project of Sergio 152 00:18:19,592 --> 00:18:26,072 Demian Lerner and others. A lot of them, I think, are in South America who are interested in this 153 00:18:26,072 --> 00:18:32,712 project. And it's awesome. It's an awesome project. We've had Gabriel Kerman. I think that was his 154 00:18:32,712 --> 00:18:40,952 name, in here recently on the Drivechain Bitcoin talk Twitter spaces. And he mentioned that metric 155 00:18:40,952 --> 00:18:47,992 about three Bitcoin per month in fees are paid to the Bitcoin miners who are merged mining RSK, 156 00:18:47,992 --> 00:18:55,352 Rootstock. And about half of Bitcoin's hash rate is merged mining Rootstock. Because, you know, 157 00:18:55,352 --> 00:19:00,712 why wouldn't you want a few extra Bitcoin a month? So if no one else merged mines Rootstock, 158 00:19:00,712 --> 00:19:03,431 then you'd be the one getting three Bitcoin a month, which is pretty good. 159 00:19:04,072 --> 00:19:11,192 So I guess there's like an economic equilibrium where the remaining half of the hash rate doesn't 160 00:19:11,192 --> 00:19:15,671 feel like doing it. But the smarter people are like, yeah, I'll take that extra money, 161 00:19:15,671 --> 00:19:22,312 even if it's like, you know, $10 extra a month for some miner that has, you know, 100 ASICs 162 00:19:23,271 --> 00:19:29,352 running, you know, 100 S9s. Maybe they, you know, they spit up the Rootstock sidechain node 163 00:19:29,911 --> 00:19:33,911 or if they're using a pool, they use a pool that does the Rootstock sidechain mining, 164 00:19:34,631 --> 00:19:40,232 such as Brains, which is the pool of Slushpool. And 165 00:19:44,072 --> 00:19:49,112 Brains has a great post on their website about merged mining and Rootstock specifically, 166 00:19:49,112 --> 00:19:52,952 and why they merge mine Rootstock and why they don't merge mine other blockchains. 167 00:19:52,952 --> 00:19:59,192 And so getting back to your question. 168 00:19:59,974 --> 00:20:02,294 Merged mining has been around for a long time, 169 00:20:02,294 --> 00:20:04,254 and there's already merged mining on Bitcoin, 170 00:20:04,254 --> 00:20:06,894 and there has been every day on Bitcoin 171 00:20:06,894 --> 00:20:08,574 merged mining for over a decade. 172 00:20:09,694 --> 00:20:11,774 So that's a fact, I believe. 173 00:20:11,774 --> 00:20:15,713 And the people who don't like merged mining will say it. 174 00:20:16,854 --> 00:20:20,793 There are some Bitcoin intellectuals, all of whom I respect, 175 00:20:20,793 --> 00:20:23,034 like, for example, Peter Todd, 176 00:20:23,034 --> 00:20:27,654 who, if I'm not mistaken, writes tweets like, you know, 177 00:20:27,654 --> 00:20:29,934 he wrote the tweet, Rootstock is, 178 00:20:29,934 --> 00:20:33,894 or wrote the tweet, RSK is an attack on Bitcoin. 179 00:20:33,894 --> 00:20:35,214 He wrote that. 180 00:20:35,214 --> 00:20:36,854 He might've been joking. 181 00:20:36,854 --> 00:20:39,093 You know, he jokes a lot, has a great sense of humor, 182 00:20:39,093 --> 00:20:43,194 but I think he's serious, at least as so far as to say, 183 00:20:43,194 --> 00:20:44,834 he thinks merged mining isn't good, 184 00:20:44,834 --> 00:20:47,174 and he probably would agree with the idea 185 00:20:47,174 --> 00:20:51,554 that Satoshi made an error when he endorsed merged mining 186 00:20:51,554 --> 00:20:53,834 in those forum posts. 187 00:20:54,834 --> 00:20:58,514 Paul Sztorc says, and I think correctly, 188 00:20:58,514 --> 00:21:02,414 that Satoshi invented or discovered merged mining. 189 00:21:03,314 --> 00:21:07,874 So, you know, from an academic crypto economic perspective, 190 00:21:07,874 --> 00:21:10,374 you know, Satoshi is the inventor or discoverer 191 00:21:10,374 --> 00:21:12,634 of the process of merged mining. 192 00:21:12,634 --> 00:21:15,414 And then to get to the core of the issue, 193 00:21:18,874 --> 00:21:21,033 Paul Sztorc's insight, which I agree with entirely, 194 00:21:21,033 --> 00:21:24,793 is that the people who object to merged mining 195 00:21:24,793 --> 00:21:29,793 because it creates a source of profit for miners, 196 00:21:31,533 --> 00:21:34,194 and that source of profit, you know, 197 00:21:34,194 --> 00:21:37,293 one could understand as a force 198 00:21:37,293 --> 00:21:39,554 that drives greater concentration 199 00:21:39,554 --> 00:21:41,194 or centralization of miners. 200 00:21:42,054 --> 00:21:44,353 The reason why they object to that 201 00:21:44,353 --> 00:21:47,594 can only be understood as an arbitrary 202 00:21:47,594 --> 00:21:52,594 and irrational prejudice against software 203 00:21:53,234 --> 00:21:54,454 that is productive. 204 00:21:55,554 --> 00:22:00,353 And that those same people who object to merged mining 205 00:22:00,353 --> 00:22:03,793 do not object to other sources of profit for miners 206 00:22:03,793 --> 00:22:06,634 that are only available to large miners, 207 00:22:06,634 --> 00:22:08,994 which inherently drives concentration in mining, 208 00:22:08,994 --> 00:22:12,753 such as arrangements with power companies, 209 00:22:12,753 --> 00:22:16,393 co-location at power facilities, 210 00:22:16,393 --> 00:22:20,294 co-location at inexpensive energy sources, 211 00:22:20,294 --> 00:22:24,714 such as falling water or geothermal, 212 00:22:24,714 --> 00:22:28,173 or any number of 1,001 other things 213 00:22:28,173 --> 00:22:31,434 that only a large professional miner can do. 214 00:22:31,434 --> 00:22:33,154 If there's a source of profit 215 00:22:33,154 --> 00:22:35,873 that only a large miner can exploit, 216 00:22:37,593 --> 00:22:40,873 such as a cost savings of having a special arrangement 217 00:22:40,873 --> 00:22:43,194 with a power company or locating in Norway 218 00:22:43,194 --> 00:22:45,593 where it's cold and there's cheap energy and oil, 219 00:22:45,593 --> 00:22:49,354 things like that, that's gonna increase their profits, 220 00:22:49,354 --> 00:22:51,274 which because of the zero-sum nature 221 00:22:51,274 --> 00:22:52,593 of competitive Bitcoin mining 222 00:22:52,593 --> 00:22:54,794 will decrease the profitability of home miners 223 00:22:54,794 --> 00:22:59,033 leading to their greater diminution, right? 224 00:22:59,033 --> 00:23:03,393 Fewer home miners exist every time some professional miner 225 00:23:03,393 --> 00:23:07,513 moves his facilities to a place that has cheaper energy, 226 00:23:07,513 --> 00:23:09,154 more energy, you know, 227 00:23:09,154 --> 00:23:12,274 every time that the bigger miners do something. 228 00:23:12,274 --> 00:23:14,714 So the question to ask, 229 00:23:14,714 --> 00:23:17,673 which I've seen Paul ask in, you know, this spaces, 230 00:23:18,714 --> 00:23:22,313 this Twitter space to people who questioned merge mining is, 231 00:23:23,673 --> 00:23:28,673 what is miner decentralization? 232 00:23:29,714 --> 00:23:32,834 And what exactly is their definition of it? 233 00:23:32,834 --> 00:23:34,533 And the other question is, 234 00:23:34,533 --> 00:23:38,013 if a miner does something 235 00:23:38,013 --> 00:23:41,934 that makes more profit for that miner, right? 236 00:23:42,593 --> 00:23:45,093 If one miner does something that increases his profits 237 00:23:45,093 --> 00:23:48,453 and that causes another miner to reduce operations 238 00:23:48,453 --> 00:23:49,613 or go out of business, 239 00:23:50,494 --> 00:23:55,494 is that an increase in miner centralization? 240 00:23:58,054 --> 00:24:00,934 And if not, what is miner centralization? 241 00:24:00,934 --> 00:24:02,414 And then the person will say, 242 00:24:03,694 --> 00:24:05,214 well, of course, you know, 243 00:24:05,214 --> 00:24:07,574 competition among miners is natural 244 00:24:07,574 --> 00:24:10,373 and is not the definition of miner centralization, 245 00:24:10,373 --> 00:24:11,774 but, you know, 246 00:24:11,774 --> 00:24:13,934 and then they give some totally convoluted, 247 00:24:13,934 --> 00:24:17,613 incoherent answer about miner centralization 248 00:24:17,613 --> 00:24:19,814 and what they really ultimately, 249 00:24:19,814 --> 00:24:22,193 if they're gonna be totally honest and straightforward, 250 00:24:22,193 --> 00:24:24,293 what they would have to do is admit 251 00:24:24,293 --> 00:24:25,814 that they don't like it, 252 00:24:25,814 --> 00:24:30,814 that some miners compete better than other miners 253 00:24:31,133 --> 00:24:33,413 and discover ways to make profit 254 00:24:33,413 --> 00:24:36,293 and that that leads to specialization 255 00:24:36,293 --> 00:24:39,013 and quote unquote centralization in mining. 256 00:24:39,974 --> 00:24:44,974 Now, the history of Bitcoin shows 257 00:24:45,133 --> 00:24:48,774 that the nodes are in charge, not the miners. 258 00:24:48,774 --> 00:24:52,013 And there have been a number of examples in history 259 00:24:52,013 --> 00:24:54,054 when certain disputes happened, 260 00:24:54,054 --> 00:24:55,693 there's like five of them, 261 00:24:55,693 --> 00:24:58,693 when like a major dispute of some sort happened 262 00:24:58,693 --> 00:25:01,214 and the nodes won and the miners didn't. 263 00:25:02,974 --> 00:25:04,293 At the same time, 264 00:25:04,293 --> 00:25:06,613 there is a complex interplay of ideas 265 00:25:06,613 --> 00:25:10,613 where one of the reasons to be interested in drivechain 266 00:25:10,613 --> 00:25:13,413 today is the so-called security budget, 267 00:25:13,413 --> 00:25:16,733 which has to do with the miner income 268 00:25:17,613 --> 00:25:19,254 and has nothing to do with nodes. 269 00:25:20,814 --> 00:25:25,293 So there are some complex ideas at play here 270 00:25:26,334 --> 00:25:31,334 that I think a sophisticated analysis 271 00:25:32,494 --> 00:25:35,974 would be needed to kind of delineate 272 00:25:36,693 --> 00:25:38,934 so I think the answer to these concerns 273 00:25:38,934 --> 00:25:43,494 is that there is a concept of centralization 274 00:25:43,494 --> 00:25:45,774 or decentralization in Bitcoin, 275 00:25:45,774 --> 00:25:47,733 but the drivechain view, 276 00:25:47,733 --> 00:25:50,534 which I think is the Paul Sztorc, 277 00:25:50,534 --> 00:25:52,494 a view that Paul Sztorc discovered 278 00:25:52,494 --> 00:25:56,494 and then other drive chainers understand and agree with 279 00:25:57,934 --> 00:26:01,334 is that the proper understanding of the word centralization 280 00:26:01,334 --> 00:26:05,133 is one which refers to nodes and not mining 281 00:26:05,133 --> 00:26:09,214 and that talking about centralization and mining is wrong 282 00:26:10,374 --> 00:26:15,374 because the only coherent understanding of centralization 283 00:26:15,853 --> 00:26:17,453 or decentralization in Bitcoin 284 00:26:17,453 --> 00:26:20,254 is the one that we can find discovered, 285 00:26:20,254 --> 00:26:25,173 laid out in Paul's post called Measuring Decentralization. 286 00:26:25,173 --> 00:26:28,413 This is a 2015 post on truthcoin.info, 287 00:26:28,413 --> 00:26:29,893 Measuring Decentralization 288 00:26:29,893 --> 00:26:31,974 and in this post, it's pretty long, 289 00:26:31,974 --> 00:26:33,334 I'll try to distill it 290 00:26:33,374 --> 00:26:35,893 because that's kind of like my whole purpose now 291 00:26:35,893 --> 00:26:38,214 as I see it is to kind of take Paul's ideas 292 00:26:38,214 --> 00:26:40,054 that are written in like a 30 page essay 293 00:26:40,054 --> 00:26:42,054 and put it down into like two sentences. 294 00:26:43,214 --> 00:26:46,853 So Measuring Decentralization says 295 00:26:46,853 --> 00:26:51,094 that as Bitcoin full nodes get cheaper, 296 00:26:51,094 --> 00:26:53,853 Bitcoin decentralization increases. 297 00:26:55,214 --> 00:26:57,534 So when we keep the block size small 298 00:26:57,534 --> 00:26:59,774 or make it even smaller like Paul wants, 299 00:26:59,774 --> 00:27:04,494 then it's cheaper to have a full node 300 00:27:04,494 --> 00:27:06,453 because there's less data to download, 301 00:27:06,453 --> 00:27:08,334 less data to transmit. 302 00:27:08,334 --> 00:27:10,293 You can use a simpler internet connection 303 00:27:10,293 --> 00:27:12,893 and a simpler computer. 304 00:27:13,934 --> 00:27:16,654 Ideally, we'd have Bitcoin nodes on our phone. 305 00:27:16,654 --> 00:27:19,094 Imagine how much more Bitcoin nodes there'd be 306 00:27:19,094 --> 00:27:21,013 if everyone just had it on their phone. 307 00:27:22,434 --> 00:27:24,374 And this has nothing to do with mining. 308 00:27:27,094 --> 00:27:29,534 Mining involves getting machines to do hashing 309 00:27:30,534 --> 00:27:31,853 whereas node running doesn't. 310 00:27:33,573 --> 00:27:35,613 Right, but there's another thing 311 00:27:35,613 --> 00:27:39,054 where miners are driven by profit 312 00:27:39,054 --> 00:27:42,173 and they can point to whatever pool they want 313 00:27:42,173 --> 00:27:44,173 and most likely they're gonna point to the pool 314 00:27:44,173 --> 00:27:46,013 that gives them the most profit. 315 00:27:46,013 --> 00:27:48,293 So if there's a pool that is running 316 00:27:48,293 --> 00:27:50,494 all the drivechain full nodes 317 00:27:50,494 --> 00:27:53,893 and is doing any kind of MEV work that is needed 318 00:27:53,893 --> 00:27:56,173 between the different drivechains, 319 00:27:56,173 --> 00:27:59,013 that pool would be the one that makes the most money 320 00:27:59,054 --> 00:28:00,133 for the miners. 321 00:28:00,133 --> 00:28:04,054 So it can also, just like theorizing, 322 00:28:04,054 --> 00:28:07,934 it can also create where a certain pool 323 00:28:07,934 --> 00:28:10,453 might have more hash rate because of that. 324 00:28:10,453 --> 00:28:13,693 And that might not necessarily be a bad thing, 325 00:28:13,693 --> 00:28:18,693 but people might look at that as it's bad for one pool 326 00:28:18,774 --> 00:28:20,814 or a small amount of pools 327 00:28:20,814 --> 00:28:23,214 to own the majority of the hash rate. 328 00:28:29,774 --> 00:28:30,853 I'm thinking about your question. 329 00:28:30,853 --> 00:28:32,053 It's a really great one. 330 00:28:34,373 --> 00:28:39,373 So your question is not one that is 331 00:28:41,453 --> 00:28:44,893 most fundamentally linked to drivechain specifically, 332 00:28:44,893 --> 00:28:46,854 but I think it can be understood as a question 333 00:28:46,854 --> 00:28:50,534 about Bitcoin generally, which is, is there a- 334 00:28:50,534 --> 00:28:53,974 But drivechains can potentially add to this, right? 335 00:28:53,974 --> 00:28:55,774 It would create more, 336 00:28:55,933 --> 00:29:00,933 it would create more profit from sophisticated pools, right? 337 00:29:02,174 --> 00:29:03,534 Whoever the pools are, 338 00:29:03,534 --> 00:29:05,453 the ones that are more sophisticated, 339 00:29:05,453 --> 00:29:07,893 the ones that might have better bandwidth, 340 00:29:07,893 --> 00:29:11,813 better connectivity, better software engineers, right? 341 00:29:11,813 --> 00:29:15,534 Those pools will essentially have more profitability. 342 00:29:15,534 --> 00:29:18,053 And by introducing drivechains, 343 00:29:18,053 --> 00:29:21,974 it might be where less pools are more sophisticated 344 00:29:21,974 --> 00:29:25,253 and less pools can eventually have more hash rate. 345 00:29:25,294 --> 00:29:27,534 As opposed to, yes, this is a normal thing 346 00:29:27,534 --> 00:29:29,654 even without drivechains, 347 00:29:29,654 --> 00:29:32,334 but with drivechains, it might add onto this. 348 00:29:36,334 --> 00:29:37,453 Right. 349 00:29:37,453 --> 00:29:38,693 I see what you're saying. 350 00:29:39,614 --> 00:29:42,693 You're asking, is there a risk that Bitcoin over time 351 00:29:42,693 --> 00:29:47,693 could exhibit so much specialization 352 00:29:49,933 --> 00:29:51,774 within the mining industry 353 00:29:51,774 --> 00:29:55,654 that there is only one player who is supremely efficient, 354 00:29:55,654 --> 00:29:58,893 everyone else has been extinguished from the market 355 00:29:58,893 --> 00:30:03,453 naturally or just eliminated from the market naturally? 356 00:30:03,453 --> 00:30:07,493 Kind of like in any other market, 357 00:30:07,493 --> 00:30:11,893 there could be like one restaurant that's so good in a town 358 00:30:11,893 --> 00:30:13,654 that everyone just goes there for dinner 359 00:30:13,654 --> 00:30:18,253 and they develop a second building 360 00:30:18,253 --> 00:30:19,654 next to their first building 361 00:30:19,654 --> 00:30:21,774 so that they can accommodate more people. 362 00:30:21,774 --> 00:30:24,013 So they're like the sole provider. 363 00:30:26,053 --> 00:30:28,253 I think it's called a monopsonist or a monopolist 364 00:30:28,253 --> 00:30:30,253 where like they're the only, yeah, monopolist. 365 00:30:30,253 --> 00:30:32,334 So they're the only producer of the good. 366 00:30:33,294 --> 00:30:38,294 And it's a natural event 367 00:30:38,534 --> 00:30:40,493 because government didn't force it to happen. 368 00:30:40,493 --> 00:30:42,893 They didn't give that restaurant a license 369 00:30:42,893 --> 00:30:46,493 to be the only restaurant in that town. 370 00:30:46,493 --> 00:30:48,654 Instead, they naturally achieved the monopoly 371 00:30:48,654 --> 00:30:51,214 by just out-competing everyone else 372 00:30:51,214 --> 00:30:53,614 because they're so efficient and talented 373 00:30:53,614 --> 00:30:56,334 and they have such a good product market approach. 374 00:30:57,933 --> 00:31:00,214 So that's your question is would that happen 375 00:31:01,414 --> 00:31:05,654 with greater likelihood if there is the added effect 376 00:31:05,654 --> 00:31:10,654 of drivechain because there is a profit opportunity 377 00:31:13,294 --> 00:31:14,974 to run the sidechain nodes 378 00:31:15,974 --> 00:31:19,133 and that for if you're running them 379 00:31:19,133 --> 00:31:20,573 and incurring that cost, 380 00:31:21,854 --> 00:31:24,094 then there's more likely gonna be 381 00:31:24,094 --> 00:31:26,813 that single player in the market. 382 00:31:26,813 --> 00:31:29,133 That's what you're saying if I understand right. 383 00:31:29,133 --> 00:31:32,734 I think that those kinds of theoretical concerns 384 00:31:32,734 --> 00:31:35,774 are totally appropriate and intelligent. 385 00:31:35,774 --> 00:31:40,654 However, a comprehensive view of everything at play 386 00:31:40,654 --> 00:31:45,614 involves understanding the security budget problem 387 00:31:45,614 --> 00:31:47,614 of not having drivechain 388 00:31:47,614 --> 00:31:52,133 and how if we don't have these sidechains paying fees, 389 00:31:52,133 --> 00:31:55,053 there might be a insufficiency 390 00:31:55,053 --> 00:31:59,094 of miner income generally over time. 391 00:31:59,094 --> 00:32:01,013 And then also if we don't have 392 00:32:01,013 --> 00:32:02,933 these peer-to-peer sidechains, 393 00:32:02,933 --> 00:32:07,933 then Bitcoin's users network effect and value 394 00:32:08,174 --> 00:32:11,373 could all be much lower possibly 395 00:32:11,373 --> 00:32:16,094 because other blockchains could accrue more users and value 396 00:32:16,094 --> 00:32:18,693 because they're more extensible and expressive 397 00:32:19,854 --> 00:32:22,453 and they have partitioned layer twos 398 00:32:22,453 --> 00:32:25,174 while Bitcoin wouldn't hypothetically 399 00:32:25,174 --> 00:32:29,493 and then they would eventually ossify their layer one 400 00:32:29,493 --> 00:32:32,334 and then they would be the one blockchain 401 00:32:32,334 --> 00:32:34,654 with the ossified layer one, 402 00:32:34,654 --> 00:32:39,614 the unparalleled market cap position 403 00:32:39,614 --> 00:32:43,133 and the design similar to drivechain 404 00:32:43,133 --> 00:32:47,053 and then they would become what Satoshi kind of invented. 405 00:32:47,053 --> 00:32:48,693 They would become like the blockchain 406 00:32:48,693 --> 00:32:50,734 that extincts all the others 407 00:32:50,734 --> 00:32:52,654 because of network effects of money, 408 00:32:52,654 --> 00:32:56,094 only one, so this is one key insight 409 00:32:56,094 --> 00:32:58,493 that drive chainers have that others don't. 410 00:32:58,493 --> 00:33:01,214 A lot of Bitcoiners in my opinion 411 00:33:01,214 --> 00:33:05,094 have just accepted and acquiesced to the notion 412 00:33:05,094 --> 00:33:07,053 that we're going to always have altcoins 413 00:33:07,053 --> 00:33:09,414 and Bitcoin will always have competition 414 00:33:09,414 --> 00:33:11,933 and that that's just part of reality. 415 00:33:11,933 --> 00:33:13,414 But that's not quite right. 416 00:33:14,813 --> 00:33:18,573 We're living in the early era of blockchain 417 00:33:18,573 --> 00:33:22,174 and the network effects have yet to fully work themselves 418 00:33:22,174 --> 00:33:24,654 through the system and in the long run, 419 00:33:24,654 --> 00:33:28,214 there'll just be one blockchain probably 420 00:33:28,214 --> 00:33:29,854 as a result of network effects 421 00:33:29,854 --> 00:33:31,974 and protocol competition by nature, 422 00:33:31,974 --> 00:33:33,174 there will just be one, 423 00:33:33,174 --> 00:33:35,573 which is the layer one for everything. 424 00:33:35,573 --> 00:33:38,414 Kind of the way that there are certain technologies 425 00:33:38,414 --> 00:33:41,493 that are at the foundation of the internet 426 00:33:41,493 --> 00:33:46,493 that are like ubiquitous across the whole internet industry 427 00:33:46,774 --> 00:33:49,854 and like almost every website is using them 428 00:33:49,854 --> 00:33:52,614 and there were other variants that were proposed 429 00:33:52,614 --> 00:33:55,414 but ultimately one just crushed all the others. 430 00:33:55,414 --> 00:33:57,253 Kind of like how in the far future, 431 00:33:57,294 --> 00:33:59,053 like in a thousand years from now, 432 00:34:00,334 --> 00:34:02,974 humans probably will just have one language 433 00:34:02,974 --> 00:34:05,774 for the whole planet because in a thousand years, 434 00:34:05,774 --> 00:34:09,094 the network effect of the best language 435 00:34:09,094 --> 00:34:12,854 will have probably extincted all the others 436 00:34:12,854 --> 00:34:14,493 and it wouldn't necessarily be the best 437 00:34:14,493 --> 00:34:18,133 because you could invent something which is better 438 00:34:18,133 --> 00:34:21,214 but because it doesn't have any network effect, 439 00:34:21,214 --> 00:34:23,534 it never catches on enough. 440 00:34:23,534 --> 00:34:27,294 So something has to be much better 441 00:34:27,294 --> 00:34:32,294 than the network effect leader in order to displace it. 442 00:34:32,774 --> 00:34:35,253 So Bitcoin has a tiny market cap 443 00:34:35,253 --> 00:34:37,253 and user base compared to the dollar. 444 00:34:37,253 --> 00:34:40,334 However, Bitcoin is much better in some ways 445 00:34:40,334 --> 00:34:42,933 and therefore Bitcoin is growing in adoption 446 00:34:42,933 --> 00:34:45,614 even though it has a small network effect, right? 447 00:34:45,614 --> 00:34:48,933 And that small network effect leads to disadvantages 448 00:34:48,933 --> 00:34:50,133 compared to the dollar. 449 00:34:50,174 --> 00:34:53,893 Like Bitcoin has a higher short-term volatility 450 00:34:53,893 --> 00:34:56,893 of purchasing power and yet people like to have it 451 00:34:56,893 --> 00:35:01,693 because its long run return is better from holding it 452 00:35:01,693 --> 00:35:05,974 and it's more permissionless and it's non-inflationary. 453 00:35:05,974 --> 00:35:08,534 So there's all kinds of experience and ideology 454 00:35:08,534 --> 00:35:11,174 that are attractive in the Bitcoin experience 455 00:35:11,174 --> 00:35:14,974 versus the dollar for some people, rightly so 456 00:35:14,974 --> 00:35:18,294 because it serves the human need of not having money 457 00:35:18,294 --> 00:35:21,534 that's being debased rapidly over long periods of time. 458 00:35:24,893 --> 00:35:26,334 So I feel like the question here- 459 00:35:26,334 --> 00:35:28,133 I think that this is all like- 460 00:35:28,133 --> 00:35:30,013 Yeah, it's kind of like a non, 461 00:35:30,013 --> 00:35:31,654 I'm kind of giving you like a non sequitur 462 00:35:31,654 --> 00:35:32,974 because you asked a good question 463 00:35:32,974 --> 00:35:34,573 and I just responded with like, 464 00:35:34,573 --> 00:35:36,933 well, here are the other considerations, 465 00:35:36,933 --> 00:35:37,774 but I also want to- 466 00:35:37,774 --> 00:35:38,614 It's more about like, 467 00:35:38,614 --> 00:35:43,174 well, here's like the pros and cons, right? 468 00:35:43,174 --> 00:35:46,253 And sure, you can say that there's a bigger risk 469 00:35:46,253 --> 00:35:48,453 of not adding drivechains. 470 00:35:49,614 --> 00:35:51,974 And I definitely share the view of, 471 00:35:51,974 --> 00:35:53,534 having smaller blocks is better 472 00:35:53,534 --> 00:35:55,654 because of better decentralization 473 00:35:55,654 --> 00:35:58,053 and a more amount of nodes. 474 00:35:58,053 --> 00:35:58,893 So I share that. 475 00:35:58,893 --> 00:36:01,893 And I share the view of drivechains in general too. 476 00:36:01,893 --> 00:36:06,094 But as somebody that wants to like drivechains 477 00:36:06,094 --> 00:36:08,253 and be able to tell others about it, 478 00:36:08,253 --> 00:36:11,614 I need to think of every possible criticism as well. 479 00:36:11,654 --> 00:36:15,534 So the criticism is like, 480 00:36:15,534 --> 00:36:17,734 the one that I just stated, 481 00:36:17,734 --> 00:36:20,614 we need to be able to like acknowledge that criticism 482 00:36:20,614 --> 00:36:22,294 or maybe even refute it 483 00:36:22,294 --> 00:36:27,294 aside from giving like pros and cons to drivechains. 484 00:36:27,414 --> 00:36:28,854 Because I can definitely agree, right? 485 00:36:28,854 --> 00:36:30,614 But I still need to understand 486 00:36:30,614 --> 00:36:32,534 how maybe this is not even a good criticism 487 00:36:32,534 --> 00:36:35,334 or how this criticism can fall apart, right? 488 00:36:35,334 --> 00:36:38,174 Because it still seems like a possible criticism 489 00:36:38,174 --> 00:36:43,174 for drivechains because of incentivizing miners 490 00:36:43,493 --> 00:36:47,053 to be in a small amount of pools because of that. 491 00:36:48,534 --> 00:36:52,414 Yeah, I wanna point you to another post. 492 00:36:52,414 --> 00:36:54,734 So one post on truthcoin.info 493 00:36:55,893 --> 00:36:58,174 is the measuring decentralization post. 494 00:36:58,174 --> 00:37:01,493 The one titled measuring decentralization from 2015, 495 00:37:01,493 --> 00:37:03,494 which Paul discussed with Nick Carter 496 00:37:03,494 --> 00:37:05,854 when he appeared on Nick Carter's podcast 497 00:37:05,854 --> 00:37:08,734 on January 31st of 2022, 498 00:37:08,734 --> 00:37:10,494 which is when I discovered Paul Sztorc 499 00:37:10,494 --> 00:37:13,653 was in that podcast episode on that day. 500 00:37:14,773 --> 00:37:17,014 And that was a great post. 501 00:37:17,014 --> 00:37:18,254 Another post though, 502 00:37:18,254 --> 00:37:20,854 that's more relevant to this exact discussion 503 00:37:20,854 --> 00:37:21,813 that you're raising, 504 00:37:21,813 --> 00:37:25,214 which is such an important one that you're raising 505 00:37:25,214 --> 00:37:29,453 is his post from January 28th, 2017. 506 00:37:29,453 --> 00:37:30,894 And the title of that post 507 00:37:30,894 --> 00:37:35,293 is The Mirage of Miner Centralization. 508 00:37:35,293 --> 00:37:38,453 The Mirage of Miner Centralization. 509 00:37:38,453 --> 00:37:40,094 And the opening paragraph, 510 00:37:40,094 --> 00:37:41,334 I'll just read these two sentences, 511 00:37:41,334 --> 00:37:45,653 says, miner centralization is hard to define. 512 00:37:45,653 --> 00:37:49,894 I present three unsatisfactory definitions 513 00:37:49,894 --> 00:37:54,894 and discover a satisfying fourth along the way. 514 00:37:55,453 --> 00:37:57,653 Mostly it is just confusing. 515 00:37:57,653 --> 00:38:00,614 So that's the opening paragraph. 516 00:38:02,453 --> 00:38:04,653 So I read this post. 517 00:38:04,653 --> 00:38:06,254 It's pretty long. 518 00:38:06,254 --> 00:38:09,494 It's like, it's around like 10 or 15 pages, 519 00:38:09,494 --> 00:38:12,494 I would say, of reading. 520 00:38:12,494 --> 00:38:14,053 It's very complicated. 521 00:38:14,053 --> 00:38:16,933 He goes through what other thinkers have said 522 00:38:16,933 --> 00:38:21,734 about the concept of centralization with respect to miners. 523 00:38:22,653 --> 00:38:27,573 And I think the main takeaway that I would say 524 00:38:27,573 --> 00:38:32,134 from this post is that everyone who's really concerned 525 00:38:32,134 --> 00:38:36,693 about how merged mining might increase centralization 526 00:38:36,693 --> 00:38:38,933 or concentration in mining 527 00:38:38,933 --> 00:38:43,933 and how blind merged mining and drivechain 528 00:38:45,094 --> 00:38:48,894 might further exacerbate that effect, 529 00:38:50,734 --> 00:38:54,773 they're all basically wrong in that concern, 530 00:38:54,773 --> 00:38:59,773 either because the damage that would arise is inevitable 531 00:39:02,894 --> 00:39:04,573 to already accrue to Bitcoin 532 00:39:04,573 --> 00:39:07,494 because of the unavoidable nature of merged mining, 533 00:39:08,533 --> 00:39:13,173 or that the benefits of merged mining 534 00:39:13,173 --> 00:39:18,173 as a solution to Bitcoin's other potential problems 535 00:39:18,693 --> 00:39:20,854 is so much greater than this concern. 536 00:39:22,453 --> 00:39:24,094 So that's another response. 537 00:39:24,094 --> 00:39:28,254 Or that the supremacy of nodes over miners 538 00:39:28,254 --> 00:39:33,254 is another reason that this whole concern is not right. 539 00:39:34,053 --> 00:39:36,773 So I think that's kind of like the attitude 540 00:39:36,773 --> 00:39:41,773 that one can have that leads to appreciation of drivechain. 541 00:39:41,974 --> 00:39:43,533 But I would also just note 542 00:39:43,533 --> 00:39:46,293 that these concepts are extremely complicated, 543 00:39:46,293 --> 00:39:48,854 and that a lot of people who talk about them 544 00:39:48,854 --> 00:39:51,014 talk about it like it's so simple. 545 00:39:51,014 --> 00:39:53,094 Like, oh, drivechain's no good 546 00:39:53,094 --> 00:39:56,053 because it'll just make us have bigger miners 547 00:39:56,053 --> 00:39:58,134 and fewer home miners. 548 00:39:58,134 --> 00:39:59,974 Like, any kind of... 549 00:39:59,397 --> 00:40:19,157 sort of pithy tweet on this topic seldom is, like, truly coherent with respect to what would be, like, a comprehensive framework of ideas that address these topics, because there are so many complicated concerns at hand. 550 00:40:19,157 --> 00:40:44,157 Like, first of all, very few people express a coherent definition of centralization in Bitcoin, whereas Paul has proposed one, which is, as full nodes get cheaper, Bitcoin's decentralization increases because people can validate that they've been paid Bitcoin more locally. 551 00:40:44,157 --> 00:41:00,157 So it is literally, physically, geographically decentralized in the sense that when I want to know that I've been paid Bitcoin, I can use my full node to validate that. I don't have to go to someone else in some other place and ask them to help me verify. 552 00:41:00,157 --> 00:41:26,157 So that's the sense of decentralization that Paul defines, which completely excludes mining from the considerations. So mining has nothing to do with it. It's all about how cheap is it to have a full node. So when someone else is like, well, miners are more centralized in Bitcoin, like they're using the word centralization in a way that Paul rejects emphatically, categorically. 553 00:41:26,157 --> 00:41:42,157 And then he does in this other post in 2017, allow for centralization to be understood in terms of like the minimum viable mining operation. That's his sense of centralization, which almost no one articulates it that way. 554 00:41:42,157 --> 00:42:06,157 And he also prefers to say concentration, I think, instead of centralization. So it's, there's a new vocabulary, this whole field is only 10 or 13 years old. So the vocabulary, the framework of ideas is highly inchoate and varied among thinkers. So that's why there's so much confusion around these topics. 555 00:42:07,157 --> 00:42:26,157 And if you look at the Blockstream white paper, where the brilliant people at Blockstream, you know, criticized drivechain on page two, I think that they don't even mention this topic explicitly. 556 00:42:26,157 --> 00:42:54,157 They refer to the incentive structure of drivechain, the fact that the code wasn't immediately available for deployment on, you know, in 2020. And not like decentralization at all. So it wasn't even raised in that albeit short description of drivechain. So I think it's an interesting topic. It's certainly a valid question. 557 00:42:56,157 --> 00:43:18,157 I feel like if Paul were here, he would say that everyone who's thinking, who thinks these things simply hasn't taken the time to read his posts on them to understand his perspective, his perspective on it. So if you're interested in miner concentration on centralization, just check out that post called The Mirage of Miner Centralization, which is on truthcoin.info. 558 00:43:18,157 --> 00:43:33,157 If you go to truthcoin.info and then click on archive at the top, you'll see all of his posts. This is quite a few weekends worth of reading. And I'm still myself working my way through these. But there's a lot of gems in here like that post. 559 00:43:33,157 --> 00:43:52,157 Yeah, I haven't had the chance to actually read everything. And he probably answers a lot of it there. But I have watched all his videos on sidechain prioritization and sidechain risks and on drivechains. So I thought I had like at least somewhat of an understanding. 560 00:43:53,157 --> 00:44:13,157 And I feel like I understand a little bit of what he means by the mining centralization and why he just doesn't use that term and how to define it through other ways. But maybe I will start reading more and it might answer a lot more things there. 561 00:44:14,157 --> 00:44:24,157 Hey, welcome to the stage, Mr. Graphics of Design's NFT Creativity One. 562 00:44:25,157 --> 00:44:38,157 What's up? Thank you for the space. I know we're talking about Bitcoin. OK, I have a question. 563 00:44:38,157 --> 00:44:54,157 I have a question. OK, if somebody like go ahead, like drop like, you know, they actually for your wallet, is that like a I mean, a hack or like it's just like they just airdropping you an NFT? 564 00:44:54,157 --> 00:45:05,157 Let's just continue with the drivechain conversation. But thanks for your question. 565 00:45:06,157 --> 00:45:29,157 So Satoshi, Satoshi Enjoyer, tell me, have you had a chance to get excited about other BIPs or is this your first time as a Bitcoin or as a crypto person getting excited about something like in that space? 566 00:45:30,157 --> 00:45:43,157 I'm not as much like as technical and I'm not that good at like reading technical specs. I'm not a developer. And in general, I learn a lot better through videos. 567 00:45:44,157 --> 00:45:56,157 So I really appreciated that Paul made all those videos, even from years ago, five years ago, six years ago. I see those videos that are like, you know, you can see like they're hours long and there's really not that many views there. 568 00:45:57,157 --> 00:46:04,157 And he even talks about, you know, maybe some people prefer videos. Maybe that's why they don't know anything about this. So I really appreciate that he put the time to make them. 569 00:46:05,157 --> 00:46:21,157 I wish that one of his videos that was cut short, he didn't get a chance to explain the blind merge mining. Maybe he'll make one later because I'm just not as good with reading it. Maybe it's easier to multitask and watch or like to review it, like go back, you know, things like that. 570 00:46:22,157 --> 00:46:38,157 As far as just general different Bitcoin stuff, I mean, I've loved Bitcoin since I've learned about it, like in 2013, 2014. I mean, I'm not as technical, so I just followed development as best as I could. 571 00:46:39,157 --> 00:47:00,157 I wasn't like extremely excited about any kind of BIPs because, I don't know, maybe SegWit was great, though I didn't fully understand its implications. I just understood that it's all right, more features that can be built upon, you know, Taproot, great, you know, people can have a single address that can actually be a multi-sig, you know, things like that, that I can understand on a higher level. 572 00:47:00,157 --> 00:47:17,157 But, you know, I don't understand like deeper. But I think that drivechain is amazing, you know, like it feels like it could be way more impactful than any previous BIPs, for sure, because it can, you know, it can unlock the door for infinite amount of ideas. 573 00:47:21,157 --> 00:47:23,157 I hope that does that answer your question. 574 00:47:23,157 --> 00:47:45,157 Yeah, totally. This is my first go around at Bitcoin Improving Proposals. I got interested in drivechain from that Nick Carter podcast with Paul a year and a few months ago. And then at one point I read all the BIPs that are on the GitHub page for the Bitcoin Improving Proposals. 575 00:47:46,157 --> 00:48:09,157 But I think Luke Dashjr. has maintained that page, if I'm not mistaken. And I read them all, I didn't detect among the ones that were written down that have not been included in Bitcoin yet, an indication that any of them have the kind of untapped value creation potential that drivechain does. 576 00:48:09,157 --> 00:48:29,157 So I think this is a singular BIP. And it's also been around for a very long time. Maybe it's the longest standing BIP that is considered by any notable thinkers to be a candidate for inclusion, despite its long tenure as one under consideration. 577 00:48:30,157 --> 00:48:48,157 It's an amazing, it's an amazing, you know, idea. I just think that, like, the reason why there isn't as much demand is because I don't think economically people that want to create an altcoin would rather do it on Bitcoin because of the limit. 578 00:48:49,157 --> 00:49:04,157 They would rather just create their own coin, right? There's an economic incentive for them to do it, even though that protocol might not be sound. And even though that protocol might, you know, disappear in a few years or whatever or fail, like they still made their money and, you know, money is what drives them. 579 00:49:05,157 --> 00:49:18,157 So they might not be as like, yeah, let's get this into drivechains on Bitcoin so we can build, because like they have a direct economic incentive for them to just build on a different, you know, on a different, completely different chain and make their own chain, right? 580 00:49:18,157 --> 00:49:40,157 It's just very hard to get everybody to want this because it seems like the people that would want this are true Bitcoiners that aren't that interested in like other, you know, other technology. 581 00:49:41,157 --> 00:49:53,157 And if they really were interested, they might just, you know, be part of that other, like, you know, other ecosystem as well. Right. And maybe it's also adding complexity to Bitcoin that they might not be as interested in. 582 00:49:54,157 --> 00:50:11,157 Or I just feel like there's a lot of barriers to really get community consensus, developer consensus to want this. I want this. Right. As long as, obviously, as long as it's secure and all the game theory is talked about a lot with everybody that understands it better than me. 583 00:50:11,157 --> 00:50:19,157 But it's just hard to see where everybody would have, you know, that agreement for it as much as I want it. 584 00:50:19,157 --> 00:50:46,157 Yeah. There's an attrition rate within the community of Bitcoiners who are interested in sidechains. And that attrition rate is high because they grow impatient and then they leave to do their altcoin, to do their idea as an altcoin or as something on an altcoin. 585 00:50:47,157 --> 00:51:01,157 Like, for example, Paul's, you know, biggest idea in Bitcoin is Hivemind, which is a peer-to-peer Oracle network that he envisions as a Bitcoin sidechain. And he wants to launch it only after a drivechain is adopted. 586 00:51:02,157 --> 00:51:14,157 A lot of people who are like Paul would get impatient and then they would leave Bitcoin entirely to do their project on Ethereum or as a independent altcoin. 587 00:51:15,157 --> 00:51:36,157 There's been years where the regulatory risks were not quite as high as they are now. And then the profit potential might be like you could make just, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars kind of overnight doing an ICO for a token, the ERC20 or whatnot. 588 00:51:37,157 --> 00:51:51,157 And then you have developed your blockchain idea. And although it's not on Bitcoin, it's not, you know, perfect, it still is a peer-to-peer digital asset network with software that's innovative and exciting. 589 00:51:51,157 --> 00:52:05,157 In other words, a new protocol. Every blockchain is a protocol. And you can build it on Ethereum or you can build it on a federated Bitcoin sidechain. And you can't right now build it on a peer-to-peer Bitcoin sidechain. 590 00:52:06,157 --> 00:52:23,157 So that's what drivechain aims to fix. And a lot of people who want to do something new, you know, they go do an altcoin. So when they do that, their incentives become such that they probably are likely to stop advocating for drivechain. 591 00:52:23,157 --> 00:52:40,157 And they in fact would like drivechain not to be adopted, because that would devalue their altcoin. Because if there is a good protocol out there that's different than Bitcoin, once drivechain is adopted, that protocol can be cloned into a drivechain. 592 00:52:40,157 --> 00:52:53,157 And then the altcoin might devalue as its users migrate to the drivechain, which would increase Bitcoin's value concomitantly as the altcoin diminishes to zero in value. 593 00:52:54,157 --> 00:53:08,157 Because there are two softwares that are competing. And one of them has Bitcoin's unit of account, which is the drivechain. And the other one has the altcoin's unit of account and the altcoin's security from fees. 594 00:53:08,157 --> 00:53:23,157 And it's better for all the users to flow over to the better system, which is the drivechain. And then that leaves the altcoin founders and loyalists alone in a small community with a small value, small security. 595 00:53:23,157 --> 00:53:41,157 So all these great thinkers who left Bitcoin, they kind of made a prediction on the future of Bitcoin. They predicted that people who stay patiently, like Paul and the drivechainers, that they won't get what they want, or they'll get it too late. 596 00:53:41,157 --> 00:54:03,157 So the future is unwritten and uncertain. And there's a great drama that will be revealed, in my view. Will drivechain be adopted or not? And when will it be adopted? Soon enough or too late for Bitcoin? 597 00:54:03,157 --> 00:54:17,157 And we don't know. So who will be vindicated? Will the people who are patient be vindicated? Or will the altcoiners who left and didn't wait for sidechains, will they be vindicated? 598 00:54:18,157 --> 00:54:37,157 Even if you want to say drivechains are alive, they still have an economic incentive to just make their own coin. Even if it will fail, they'll still make the money. So it's still very hard, even if drivechains are currently alive and they can build on them. 599 00:54:37,157 --> 00:54:46,157 Though, yeah, in the long term, if they wanted to build something that will last and that makes more sense, they would do it on Bitcoin. But most people don't care for that. They care to make money. 600 00:54:47,157 --> 00:55:09,157 Right now, the rationale for altcoins legitimately can include that drivechains don't exist. So an altcoin founder can say to his founders and the intellectuals who interrogate him, he can say, right now, Bitcoin doesn't have peer-to-peer sidechains. 601 00:55:10,157 --> 00:55:28,157 Therefore, it would be impossible to build my protocol as a peer-to-peer sidechain on Bitcoin. Bitcoin lacks extensibility. Therefore, I need to do an altcoin. And yes, incidentally, it causes a windfall because there's an ICO. But I need to do an altcoin. 602 00:55:31,157 --> 00:55:36,157 I see. They start from the premise where they have to make an altcoin because there's no other way for them to do it. 603 00:55:36,157 --> 00:55:51,157 If you read, as I'm sure you have, the Ethereum whitepaper, as I recently reread it, it becomes so clear that the lack of drivechain was the reason for that altcoin. And that's been the reason for every altcoin. 604 00:55:52,157 --> 00:56:00,157 The Bitcoiners who say that all altcoins are founded for profit motive and if drivechain is introduced, that won't change, I think are wrong. 605 00:56:01,157 --> 00:56:18,157 These altcoins, the ones that are serious, there are silly things like Dogecoin and Hex where it's all about just image and hype. It's more of a fashion or art event than it is a protocol for economic value creation through utilization. 606 00:56:19,157 --> 00:56:25,157 Things like Ethereum are seriously trying to develop something that competes with Bitcoin. 607 00:56:26,157 --> 00:56:39,157 And they understand that platforming a wide variety of applications in a permissive and permissionless manner with a high degree of extensibility is the way to try to defeat Bitcoin. 608 00:56:39,157 --> 00:56:49,157 Because what Bitcoin does is the opposite. Bitcoin is all about like cypherpunk values, hard money, but it lacks all that fun bells and whistles stuff. 609 00:56:50,157 --> 00:57:01,157 And some of the bells and whistles on Ethereum are legitimate ideas like peer-to-peer Oracle networks or other technology like domain name service. 610 00:57:02,157 --> 00:57:09,157 So DNS, ENS, that's the one Satoshi thought was cool and he would have thought peer-to-peer oracles are cool too. 611 00:57:10,157 --> 00:57:20,157 And there's other technologies that are cool and exciting and that tends to legitimize the entire other platform, even though maybe the majority of its economic activity is NFTs. 612 00:57:21,157 --> 00:57:26,157 Which, by the way, one can't dismiss. I mean, art has been part of the human experience forever. 613 00:57:27,157 --> 00:57:36,157 And there's no reason to say that all digital art is somehow a illogical or immoral activity. 614 00:57:37,157 --> 00:57:40,157 Or to just hope that it goes away entirely. 615 00:57:41,157 --> 00:57:53,157 So the establishment of drivechain would remove a large part of the rationale which is expressed by the Ethereum white paper. 616 00:57:54,157 --> 00:57:57,157 Now, of course, Ethereum predated Bitcoin, predated drivechain rather. 617 00:57:58,157 --> 00:58:01,157 It predated drivechain. It was 2014 Ethereum, 2015 drivechain. 618 00:58:01,157 --> 00:58:18,157 But in theory, had drivechain been embraced by the Bitcoin community, altcoins like Ethereum and others would be deprived of the rationale that they cite primarily in their literature and discourse for their reason for being. 619 00:58:19,157 --> 00:58:27,157 Which is that Bitcoin lacks extensibility and therefore we're doing a different protocol entirely independent from Bitcoin. 620 00:58:28,157 --> 00:58:38,157 There's also this coping mechanism among Bitcoiners, which is as I see it, which is that Ethereum is a sidechain of Bitcoin, that everything's a sidechain of Bitcoin. 621 00:58:39,157 --> 00:58:43,157 Like this is sophistry. It's not correct. 622 00:58:44,157 --> 00:58:48,157 Like wrapped Bitcoin on Ethereum, yes, it increases Bitcoin's value. 623 00:58:49,157 --> 00:58:51,157 But that wrapped Bitcoin is necessarily federated. 624 00:58:52,157 --> 00:58:53,157 It's not peer to peer. 625 00:58:53,157 --> 00:59:02,157 It's a company that's issuing supposedly fully backed Bitcoin derivatives on Ethereum. 626 00:59:03,157 --> 00:59:04,157 And there's $4 billion of demand there. 627 00:59:05,157 --> 00:59:12,157 I see that as an indication that drivechain's value would be in the billions, if not more. 628 00:59:13,157 --> 00:59:17,157 Because we have $4 billion of Ethereum wrapped Bitcoin on Ethereum. 629 00:59:17,157 --> 00:59:34,157 So why think that we would have any less on drivechains when drivechains are peer to peer and WBTC is a completely federated multi-sig at one company. 630 00:59:35,157 --> 00:59:38,157 So it's inferior, strictly speaking. 631 00:59:38,157 --> 00:59:50,157 And also there's this totally surprising line of reasoning by some drivechain haters on Twitter, which is that, well, federated sidechains are better than miner controlled sidechains. 632 00:59:51,157 --> 00:59:53,157 I would never trust my Bitcoin to the miners. 633 00:59:54,157 --> 00:59:58,157 How are these people interested in Bitcoin if they don't trust the miners? 634 00:59:59,307 --> 01:00:07,707 51% of Bitcoin miners can be deployed to steal from a drivechain. It would take six months and be public. 635 01:00:08,747 --> 01:00:14,347 But if we assume that Bitcoin miners would be willing to steal from drivechains 636 01:00:16,427 --> 01:00:21,786 over six months in a public manner, where 51% of the hash rate is needed, 637 01:00:21,786 --> 01:00:28,827 then we must also be prepared to assume the same with respect to Bitcoin layer one. 638 01:00:28,827 --> 01:00:37,706 So imagine if 51% of Bitcoin's hash rate were devoted for six months to trying to steal 639 01:00:37,706 --> 01:00:46,826 from layer one. That would be a 13,500 block reorg. And it would be conducted in secret 640 01:00:47,706 --> 01:00:56,346 as opposed to being conducted not in secret because drivechain theft is public by operation 641 01:00:56,346 --> 01:01:01,067 of the nature of the setup. Like if you try to steal from a drivechain, everyone knows immediately 642 01:01:01,067 --> 01:01:08,266 the minute it begins for six months. Whereas a reorg on layer one can be done without any 643 01:01:08,266 --> 01:01:14,266 kind of announcement of that nature. So the theft is actually easier. And this is discussed 644 01:01:14,427 --> 01:01:21,306 in greater detail in the drivechain FAQ. So if you go to drivechain.info and then click on FAQ, 645 01:01:22,026 --> 01:01:26,346 at the very beginning, Paul addresses this. Even so, the critics of drivechain 646 01:01:27,867 --> 01:01:33,227 talk endlessly about there being miner theft and that the drivechain could be stolen from. 647 01:01:33,227 --> 01:01:40,187 This is in the Blockstream's liquid white paper. And of course, the other objection that drivechain 648 01:01:40,507 --> 01:01:45,306 critics have is the opposite. So the critics can't even agree with each other because 649 01:01:45,306 --> 01:01:47,867 half of them think that the miners will steal from the drivechain. 650 01:01:48,586 --> 01:01:54,586 The other half say that the drivechains will cause undue concentration in the mining sector, 651 01:01:55,147 --> 01:02:00,187 which of course is logically incompatible with the notion that the drivechains will be stolen 652 01:02:00,187 --> 01:02:04,747 from. Because if they're stolen from, they're destroyed and there's no more fee revenue 653 01:02:04,827 --> 01:02:10,746 from merge mining. But if they're not stolen from, then they're going to grow large and then 654 01:02:11,706 --> 01:02:16,587 there would be the fee revenue. So the critics of drivechain, half of them think there'll be theft. 655 01:02:16,587 --> 01:02:20,186 The other half think there won't be theft, but there'll be too much decentralization, 656 01:02:20,186 --> 01:02:25,626 too much loss of decentralization of miners. So the critics can't even make up their mind 657 01:02:25,626 --> 01:02:33,546 about what's going on. So it's all very complicated. I do, however, think that 658 01:02:33,546 --> 01:02:39,787 the critics are smart and good people. I don't doubt that any of them are well-intentioned. 659 01:02:40,507 --> 01:02:46,667 So I'm hopeful that the scientific community and Bitcoin will come around. People like Peter Todd 660 01:02:48,507 --> 01:02:56,746 and Andrew Polstra and Greg Maxwell and Peter Weil, if those people, if those names I just 661 01:02:56,746 --> 01:03:01,466 mentioned were all to come out and say, we've thought about it and we stand for drivechain, 662 01:03:01,466 --> 01:03:07,227 we'd have a drivechain adoption in Bitcoin probably in no time at all, like in a year from 663 01:03:07,227 --> 01:03:16,746 now. It would take about a year to prepare the code and to get everyone ready. But those names, 664 01:03:16,746 --> 01:03:22,106 I think, hold one or more of the objections that we've discussed today, either the miner theft or 665 01:03:22,587 --> 01:03:31,787 the miner centralization risk. Or there's the Jimmy Song objection, which he spoke to me in 666 01:03:31,787 --> 01:03:38,427 a Twitter space on Christianity and Bitcoin about half a year ago, where I just happened to be. 667 01:03:39,546 --> 01:03:44,427 And I asked him a question about drivechain. I asked him, do you still hold the view that you 668 01:03:44,427 --> 01:03:50,746 held in 2018 when you interviewed Paul on your podcast where you said, Jimmy, that you said that 669 01:03:51,227 --> 01:03:57,466 you think drivechain's great and you hope it's adopted soon. And he said, no, my view is now 670 01:03:57,466 --> 01:04:03,787 the opposite, which is I'm against it entirely. And I asked why. And he said, because it would 671 01:04:03,787 --> 01:04:08,587 cede too much to the old coiners. It would legitimize them. So unfortunately, that's 672 01:04:08,587 --> 01:04:17,626 what we're dealing with today. I think that if I ever have the chance to talk to someone like 673 01:04:18,507 --> 01:04:22,987 Greg Maxwell, I think he would say something probably like what's in the liquid white paper, 674 01:04:22,987 --> 01:04:28,507 which is an academic objection like the ones you've asked about, centralization of miners 675 01:04:28,507 --> 01:04:34,107 because of blind merge mining, increasing profits from merge mining. And the miners wouldn't be 676 01:04:34,107 --> 01:04:38,107 blind. They would have to run the nodes to make the MEV. And therefore, there'd be only bigger 677 01:04:38,107 --> 01:04:43,787 miners. And then Paul's objection to that, which is that, well, you're just objecting to one kind 678 01:04:43,787 --> 01:04:47,947 of profit because it's based in software, but you don't object to the non-software based profits, 679 01:04:47,947 --> 01:04:54,026 like better ASICs. If someone buys a $20,000 ASIC, they're going to outcompete the guy at 680 01:04:54,026 --> 01:04:58,746 home with his five-year-old S9. So the S9 won't make any more money. It'll have to turn off. 681 01:04:59,306 --> 01:05:04,107 So that centralization, just getting better ASICs because they have more efficiency. 682 01:05:04,827 --> 01:05:11,626 And the other objection is the miner theft. And then there's the Jimmy Song objection, 683 01:05:11,626 --> 01:05:18,267 which is that it just, because he's afraid that he, in my view, I assume, he's afraid that altcoins 684 01:05:18,267 --> 01:05:23,547 will just grow and grow and grow. And if Bitcoin does drivechain, then that's Bitcoin admitting 685 01:05:25,067 --> 01:05:30,667 that altcoins are doing something legitimate, which is that there are some technologies 686 01:05:31,387 --> 01:05:39,547 like big blocks, peer-to-peer oracles, DNS, and Zcash, you know, ring signatures and 687 01:05:39,547 --> 01:05:45,547 Z signatures and whatnot, like Monero. Those are the things that are the planned drivechains. 688 01:05:45,547 --> 01:05:49,466 Those are the things that we expect to be on drivechains, right? Paul has a list of them. 689 01:05:49,466 --> 01:05:55,387 If you go to drivechain.info and then click on drivechain projects, you can see like the six 690 01:05:55,387 --> 01:06:02,507 or 10 planned drivechains, the drivechains that he expects to be created because each of these is 691 01:06:02,507 --> 01:06:08,507 basically an altcoin, which really should be a Bitcoin sidechain and would be better if it's a 692 01:06:08,507 --> 01:06:14,426 Bitcoin sidechain, better for the users, better for everyone. So there are, you could say from 693 01:06:14,426 --> 01:06:19,947 that, that, you know, the drivechain view is that there are about six or 10 good altcoins and they 694 01:06:19,947 --> 01:06:23,707 should be drivechains. And Jimmy Song doesn't want us to admit that, even though it's real. 695 01:06:24,346 --> 01:06:29,947 It's true. And he probably knows it because if somebody wants to be extremely private 696 01:06:29,947 --> 01:06:34,346 with their transactions, are they going to use Bitcoin or are they going to use Zcash or Monero 697 01:06:34,346 --> 01:06:41,707 instead? The markets for... Yeah, I think he doesn't understand that adding drivechains is not 698 01:06:41,707 --> 01:06:45,626 legitimizing altcoins. On the opposite, it's delegitimizing them because they can be done 699 01:06:45,626 --> 01:06:51,306 better on Bitcoin. Exactly. It actually, it actually solves his issue that he has, right? 700 01:06:51,306 --> 01:06:56,987 Exactly. It doesn't make it work. Yeah. So what would Andreas say? Because I know 701 01:06:57,547 --> 01:07:04,026 Andreas got a lot of, you know, like, I guess, hate for writing that Mastering Ethereum book. 702 01:07:04,987 --> 01:07:09,466 You know, a lot of Bitcoiners might have, like, kind of shunned him for that. And it seems like 703 01:07:09,466 --> 01:07:14,107 he's just been, I don't know, I haven't followed too much. He might have been quiet for a while. 704 01:07:14,107 --> 01:07:19,947 But I think Andreas would be very, very pro this type of drivechain model. I would love to hear 705 01:07:19,947 --> 01:07:30,346 his takes. I can tell you what he said. I have it. I have these notes on what people have said about 706 01:07:31,227 --> 01:07:36,827 drivechain. I'm looking for this document where I kept this. I can't find it at the moment. 707 01:07:38,746 --> 01:07:43,387 That's OK. You can always DM me and I guess I'll do some research too and see if he's ever 708 01:07:43,947 --> 01:07:49,067 talked about it publicly. So there's a tweet of his from the past or an article that I found once 709 01:07:49,146 --> 01:07:55,626 where he said that sidechains are great. Sidechains increase the capabilities for Bitcoin. 710 01:07:56,426 --> 01:08:00,346 So there's a tweet of his from like years ago, like 2016, where he said that. 711 01:08:00,906 --> 01:08:04,827 And since then, there's been no comment. And he's never written about drivechain exactly 712 01:08:04,827 --> 01:08:09,146 or specifically, I think, just from my memory. I don't think he's ever commented on it. 713 01:08:10,186 --> 01:08:17,387 And I'm not sure. But I would agree that it would not be at all surprising if Andreas were to 714 01:08:17,947 --> 01:08:24,186 take time to thoroughly study drivechain based on his interest in Ethereum. If you 715 01:08:24,186 --> 01:08:30,186 wrote a whole book about how Ethereum works, probably he would come around to the idea that 716 01:08:31,147 --> 01:08:35,626 at the very least, drivechain is a very interesting idea, which if the Bitcoin 717 01:08:35,626 --> 01:08:42,907 community were to adopt it, there is a serious chance that it could become very successful 718 01:08:43,707 --> 01:08:48,746 and helpful for Bitcoin in many ways by increasing the Bitcoin community's 719 01:08:49,866 --> 01:08:57,147 capacity for innovation and experimentation in a way that internalizes to Bitcoin the value 720 01:08:57,147 --> 01:09:02,666 of that innovation. That's a concept I got from Hasu, the Ethereum guy who rage quit Bitcoin 721 01:09:02,666 --> 01:09:07,387 long ago. Actually, I shouldn't say rage quit. I haven't read the writings where he announced 722 01:09:07,387 --> 01:09:12,746 that he was leaving. But he said at one point, I've sold all my Bitcoin. I'm in Ethereum now. 723 01:09:12,746 --> 01:09:18,986 I think he said that on Twitter at some point. And he's also I've seen like he applauded when 724 01:09:18,986 --> 01:09:24,027 other people have done the same. So he's one of the people who would say probably that Bitcoin 725 01:09:24,027 --> 01:09:30,827 has like a doomed security budget. And he also probably would say like a lot of smart people 726 01:09:30,827 --> 01:09:34,907 that it appears that Bitcoin is never going to do drivechain or if they do it, they'll do it 727 01:09:34,907 --> 01:09:38,827 much too late. And therefore they've gone off to other other pastures. 728 01:09:41,786 --> 01:09:48,507 So, yeah, like Antonopoulos and others. They think the drivechain is cool, but maybe they're 729 01:09:48,507 --> 01:09:53,546 skeptical because there's too many people like Jimmy Song who are, in my opinion, you know, 730 01:09:53,546 --> 01:10:00,027 he's a great, awesome, cool dude, but he's kind of like locked in to this toxic maxi ideology. 731 01:10:00,027 --> 01:10:05,306 In fact, he has tweeted things like Ethereum is gaining market share to Bitcoin because 732 01:10:05,306 --> 01:10:09,626 Bitcoin aren't being toxic enough. And in other words, like if we just tweet more 733 01:10:11,147 --> 01:10:19,067 angry things about Ethereum being a shit coin, then we'll somehow drive it out of existence. 734 01:10:19,067 --> 01:10:24,426 This is like a, it makes no sense. It's counterproductive because by dividing people 735 01:10:25,306 --> 01:10:30,986 by nature, you are you're forcing people to pick sides. And by nature, the side will get stronger 736 01:10:30,986 --> 01:10:36,426 because like just like if you take two wrestlers, right, when one wrestler starts to work hard, 737 01:10:36,426 --> 01:10:42,426 the other wrestler is going to need to work just as hard to at least keep up. Right. So by working 738 01:10:42,426 --> 01:10:47,147 hard against somebody, you're you're making the other person work harder, too. So I don't I think 739 01:10:47,147 --> 01:10:52,267 that's counterproductive. Being toxic towards people is not a way to include them and bring 740 01:10:52,267 --> 01:10:56,666 them to your camp. It's a way to divide them and make their camp potentially stronger. 741 01:10:56,666 --> 01:11:02,426 Yeah. Like in the book Zero to One, Peter Thiel has this great insight about how like when 742 01:11:02,426 --> 01:11:08,027 Microsoft was just beginning to lose some of its momentum and sort of innovative spirit. 743 01:11:09,387 --> 01:11:15,226 That's when it began to be very focused on the competition and very focused on worrying about 744 01:11:15,226 --> 01:11:22,106 others. So Bitcoiners who are toxic are defining themselves to the extent that they embrace the 745 01:11:22,106 --> 01:11:30,106 toxic Bitcoin identity. They they're defying themselves in contradistinction, in contradistinction 746 01:11:30,106 --> 01:11:37,707 to their competition. And that is exactly what Peter Thiel says is not a good sign. 747 01:11:37,707 --> 01:11:45,546 You don't want a company that says we're not them. For example, like for me at LayerTwo Labs, 748 01:11:45,546 --> 01:11:51,306 I feel that there is no other company in existence that is doing what we're doing. 749 01:11:52,106 --> 01:11:58,507 We're trying to promote understanding of drivechain and we have no competition. 750 01:11:58,507 --> 01:12:03,626 There's no one else that has like something quite similar to drivechain, but different. 751 01:12:04,587 --> 01:12:08,587 And then we're different than they are, and we're worried that they're gaining attention and we're 752 01:12:08,587 --> 01:12:14,746 not like we're all alone. This is like it's like Elon Musk is the only person that anyone can name 753 01:12:14,746 --> 01:12:19,786 probably who's trying to go to Mars. Like I don't know of anyone else saying Bitcoin, 754 01:12:20,106 --> 01:12:25,546 the world needs to go to Mars. We have to get humans on Mars, colonize Mars. That way, 755 01:12:25,546 --> 01:12:30,986 if the Earth gets struck by an asteroid or runs out of resources, we can live on Mars and the 756 01:12:30,986 --> 01:12:35,866 human race won't die. Like I haven't heard anyone else say that in my experience. I'm not like a 757 01:12:35,866 --> 01:12:42,027 space enthusiast, but my point is that he has a singular mission in mind. He has a singular identity 758 01:12:42,027 --> 01:12:48,587 as the Mars mission evangelist for humanity. So he's all alone in that way. 759 01:12:49,467 --> 01:12:53,306 And I feel the same way about drivechain. This is a unique, very exciting thing, 760 01:12:53,947 --> 01:13:01,147 which this is like the thing that can save Bitcoin from itself. And we have to educate people like 761 01:13:01,147 --> 01:13:08,426 Jimmy Song and Peter Todd. I mean, they know much more than I do, but I feel that on economics, 762 01:13:08,426 --> 01:13:14,106 on this specific topic of Bitcoin extensibility, security budget, innovation and creativity, 763 01:13:14,106 --> 01:13:20,587 and L1 ossification, in every way, all those different key drivechain concepts, they don't 764 01:13:20,587 --> 01:13:25,306 quite put it all together and understand how this is what can move Bitcoin forward. 765 01:13:25,306 --> 01:13:31,546 They would prefer to continue with, in Jimmy Song's case, the toxicity, or in Peter Todd's 766 01:13:31,546 --> 01:13:38,507 case, the preference for inflation rather than merge mining. And they don't quite put it all 767 01:13:38,507 --> 01:13:42,507 together and see that it would be in their interest to just shift camp and be part of the 768 01:13:42,507 --> 01:13:47,226 drivechain camp, which can truly save Bitcoin. And I would welcome any of them, if they ever 769 01:13:47,226 --> 01:13:54,507 listen to this, to engage with us and to chat with us so that we can be educated and change our mind 770 01:13:54,507 --> 01:14:00,907 or that they can learn maybe and change theirs. I feel like so many smart people have just left 771 01:14:00,907 --> 01:14:06,426 Bitcoin and given up for reasons you point out, because, hey, if you leave Bitcoin and just let 772 01:14:06,426 --> 01:14:13,067 it wither, then you make so much more money. Like, imagine you're Hasu, right? And in 20-whatever, 773 01:14:13,067 --> 01:14:18,907 15, 17, I don't know when it happened, but he left Bitcoin, probably for all the reasons that 774 01:14:18,907 --> 01:14:23,467 we're discussing today, because he has explicitly tweeted in favor of drivechain. He's written, 775 01:14:23,467 --> 01:14:30,027 drivechain good. Bitcoin needs a way to internalize innovation on its own blockchain. 776 01:14:30,027 --> 01:14:35,067 That's exactly almost a quote. It's from memory, but you can find it on Twitter easily. Just do an 777 01:14:35,067 --> 01:14:41,546 advanced search for Hasu drivechain. You'll see it. So, you know, he said it. Plenty of other 778 01:14:41,546 --> 01:14:47,306 altcoiners said it, like Evan Van Ness, the Ethereum maxi shill, who tweets every single day 779 01:14:47,306 --> 01:14:51,626 on Twitter about how Ethereum is better than Bitcoin because Bitcoin needs inflation eventually. 780 01:14:52,587 --> 01:14:56,347 I asked him on Twitter like a month ago, you know, what do you think of drivechain? He said 781 01:14:56,347 --> 01:15:00,267 drivechain would be great for Bitcoin, but I would bet you that Bitcoin will never do it. 782 01:15:01,147 --> 01:15:08,106 So he's like cynical. He's made up his mind that there are too many people with Jimmy Song's idea 783 01:15:08,106 --> 01:15:14,587 about legitimizing altcoins as a bad thing. So like people have placed their bets like Hasu. 784 01:15:14,587 --> 01:15:20,347 He's left Bitcoin. Evan's left Bitcoin. They don't think that Bitcoin will upgrade appropriately. 785 01:15:20,347 --> 01:15:23,866 And then they're going to be part of the investment camp and the career 786 01:15:24,746 --> 01:15:28,986 camp that is part of the school that's vindicated through the flippening. 787 01:15:28,986 --> 01:15:35,306 And then they'll make money and look smart and win. So a lot of people are doing that. 788 01:15:36,267 --> 01:15:41,067 And then there's people like Paul who've just remained in Bitcoin because they have this 789 01:15:41,067 --> 01:15:47,147 identity of a Bitcoin or they have this identity that like just always be a Bitcoin. This is what 790 01:15:47,947 --> 01:15:52,587 says to me in Cafe Bitcoin and Clubhouse, you know, where we chat almost every day, 791 01:15:53,467 --> 01:15:59,387 you know, he says Bitcoin is the he didn't say the things I just said about identity. 792 01:15:59,387 --> 01:16:02,907 He wouldn't put it in those words. I don't want to misquote him, but he did say to me and he 793 01:16:02,907 --> 01:16:10,746 has said publicly on Cafe Bitcoin to the people who hang out there where I am often that Bitcoin 794 01:16:10,746 --> 01:16:16,347 is the only project that matters and it'll always be that way. So some people just feel like Bitcoin 795 01:16:16,347 --> 01:16:20,666 is it and always will be because they live during that. I feel that they have a bias because they 796 01:16:20,666 --> 01:16:27,947 live during that era when Bitcoin was at 100 percent market cap. And then for years, I had 797 01:16:27,947 --> 01:16:33,947 like 90 percent or 80 percent. So for a long time, Bitcoin was always number one. And there were some 798 01:16:33,947 --> 01:16:39,226 periods where it would climb back up a little bit from 70 percent back to 80 percent. So they 799 01:16:39,226 --> 01:16:44,347 thought that it would always be that way. And people in that mindset who have a loyalty, 800 01:16:44,347 --> 01:16:53,226 who have an emotional attachment to certain ideas, they're often the last to see reality for what it 801 01:16:53,226 --> 01:17:03,546 is. And therefore they let their emotions get ahead of their ideas, their intellect is unfortunately 802 01:17:05,627 --> 01:17:10,426 limited in their perceptive ability because they're attached to the idea that Bitcoin is 803 01:17:10,666 --> 01:17:16,426 perfect and great and first and best. And they don't see these concepts like it used to be a 804 01:17:16,426 --> 01:17:23,386 maxi trope that any good idea Bitcoin would adopt. But that's not possible without something like 805 01:17:23,386 --> 01:17:31,947 drivechain, right? How is Bitcoin ever going to adopt in a peer to peer manner? Zcash privacy or 806 01:17:32,906 --> 01:17:40,827 big block Bitcoin level scalability? There was some thinking that, well, lightning will solve 807 01:17:40,827 --> 01:17:46,266 everything. We'll do all of this on lightning. Yeah. How is that panning out? Is that really 808 01:17:46,266 --> 01:17:51,867 the case? One of the things Paul often says is that the discourse in lightning is much bleaker 809 01:17:52,426 --> 01:17:57,227 than what you hear from plebs. If you ask like a Bitcoiner, we'll just say, well, we'll build it 810 01:17:57,227 --> 01:18:01,227 all on lightning. But then you ask one of the leading lightning developers, like one of the 811 01:18:01,227 --> 01:18:05,786 top five people in the world who is running the technology division of a lightning company. 812 01:18:06,347 --> 01:18:11,306 They won't talk like that. They'll talk about the limitations and difficulties of lightning. 813 01:18:12,666 --> 01:18:16,987 Not they're not going to say, yeah, we'll build every single blockchain protocol can be built 814 01:18:16,987 --> 01:18:21,867 on lightning. They're not going to say that. So lightning is not the panacea for these matters. 815 01:18:21,867 --> 01:18:27,467 And the economic uptake of lightning certainly wouldn't indicate it is. So we need we need a 816 01:18:27,467 --> 01:18:33,386 killer app. We need something that's huge for Bitcoin to save it. But of course, most maxis 817 01:18:33,386 --> 01:18:37,786 don't have that thinking. They don't think that way. They don't think that we need a transformative 818 01:18:37,786 --> 01:18:41,786 change. They think everything's fine in Bitcoin. We're doing just fine. We're number one still. 819 01:18:42,747 --> 01:18:49,227 But like, I see the writing on the wall. The fees are low. The old coins are growing. 820 01:18:51,227 --> 01:18:56,026 In Paul's view, there are only two blockchains that are genuinely and seriously pursuing 821 01:18:56,987 --> 01:19:04,186 the objective of global. Massive adoption, Bitcoin and Ethereum, those are the two projects 822 01:19:04,186 --> 01:19:08,666 aiming for that 100 trillion dollar market cap, and only one of them will get there 823 01:19:09,467 --> 01:19:13,627 because of the fact that protocols are inherently competitive for network effects, 824 01:19:13,627 --> 01:19:19,386 only one will win and the other will be completely eliminated. It's like languages, 825 01:19:20,347 --> 01:19:23,546 right? There's only going to be one dominant language in the world in the future. 826 01:19:24,266 --> 01:19:28,347 In a thousand years from now, there aren't going to be 500 languages. 827 01:19:31,707 --> 01:19:35,146 Unless you're in like the linguistics department of some school that studies 828 01:19:35,146 --> 01:19:38,347 ancient languages. I'm not saying they'll be completely eliminated, but 829 01:19:41,546 --> 01:19:48,587 there is that competition. Well, I've been talking your ear off this whole time. 830 01:19:49,306 --> 01:19:55,867 In our last few minutes, why don't you share your thoughts? And also, I want to mention to 831 01:19:55,867 --> 01:20:02,987 the person whose name is Body is no longer the something, Body Autonomizer. I don't know why 832 01:20:04,107 --> 01:20:08,186 you've been unable to join the stage. Every time you've requested to join, I've clicked 833 01:20:08,186 --> 01:20:15,067 approve, but it hasn't let you in. And that was recently the case in the past where I couldn't 834 01:20:15,067 --> 01:20:20,506 get people on stage. Like in our last spaces, Paul was trying to join the stage and he couldn't get 835 01:20:20,506 --> 01:20:29,146 on. So maybe Twitter is having a problem. Like right now, I'll click that you can speak. 836 01:20:29,146 --> 01:20:31,146 It says he's a speaker. He should be able to speak. 837 01:20:32,506 --> 01:20:33,627 Paul, why don't you try to speak? 838 01:20:33,627 --> 01:20:39,947 Hey, it's on my side, guys. I'm driving and I have the maps on and every time 839 01:20:40,906 --> 01:20:45,067 it switches to the maps, it'll cut the sound off. My mic's still on, but I can't hear what you guys 840 01:20:45,067 --> 01:20:51,707 are saying. So that's my fault. So it's probably a little too late to bring up the things I wanted 841 01:20:51,707 --> 01:21:02,186 to bring up. But, you know, on the whole maxi thing, I think they're kind of a necessary. 842 01:21:03,786 --> 01:21:08,026 I don't know what you want to call it, but I don't think you're going to win any 843 01:21:08,506 --> 01:21:15,467 hardcore Bitcoiners over anyway. But like the ones who are in between, if you're a noob, 844 01:21:15,467 --> 01:21:20,347 you're going to take the side of like fundamentalism, you know, you're going to take the side 845 01:21:20,347 --> 01:21:25,947 of the people who want to defend the castle. And I think that's like they see themselves as that. 846 01:21:25,947 --> 01:21:30,266 That's their role is to defend the castle, which maybe is necessary, you know. 847 01:21:31,227 --> 01:21:39,546 Can you guys hear me? Yeah. The noobs are going to do whatever the thought leaders say. So if 848 01:21:39,546 --> 01:21:50,827 Peter Song says to followers in his next book, you know, drivechain is fascinating and awesome, 849 01:21:50,827 --> 01:21:56,266 then that's what they'll say. Because that's how people like us, right? We're going to 850 01:21:57,227 --> 01:22:03,067 that's what they'll say. Because that's how people are. They look to their experts, 851 01:22:03,067 --> 01:22:11,146 those with high status, big followings, and they parrot what they think. Because that's just the 852 01:22:11,146 --> 01:22:15,707 most efficient way to be a human thinker is to rely on experts rather than trying to do everything 853 01:22:15,707 --> 01:22:20,827 yourself. Because, you know, then you like you go to the doctor, you go to the hospital, you do 854 01:22:20,827 --> 01:22:25,146 what the doctor says. Take the medicine he recommends. Don't try to learn brain surgery 855 01:22:25,146 --> 01:22:34,186 yourself. So yeah, good point. But are you trying to get off now? Because I wanted to talk about 856 01:22:36,747 --> 01:22:44,266 one of one possible like state state game theory that hasn't really been brought up. All right. 857 01:22:45,227 --> 01:22:50,987 Uh, so like I talked on here once before, and I was talking about how I like lightning. 858 01:22:50,987 --> 01:22:55,386 I, I agree with you. I think it's got limitations just from running my own lightning node. 859 01:22:55,947 --> 01:23:03,067 I know there's no way I'll ever be able to keep up with, you know, a high powered 100 channel node, 860 01:23:03,067 --> 01:23:08,587 you know, making making a half a Bitcoin a day. You know, I struggle to make 100 sats a month. 861 01:23:09,546 --> 01:23:18,587 So I think it kind of has that centralizing property. But I also it's like my security 862 01:23:18,587 --> 01:23:23,947 blanket, you know, I know I'm never going to hide from some intelligence, intelligence agency with 863 01:23:24,506 --> 01:23:32,666 my node, but I can hide from like incompetent IRS agents and lower level foods if I need to, 864 01:23:32,747 --> 01:23:41,627 you know. So the, the attack, our thinking is, you know, once you get a privacy chain, 865 01:23:42,506 --> 01:23:50,266 permissionlessly connected to the BTC time chain, then maybe that opens it up to a more 866 01:23:50,266 --> 01:23:57,867 game theory types. They get state attack where the high level intelligence agencies are really 867 01:23:57,947 --> 01:24:02,426 worried about this thing. It becomes more of a focus. Not that it's not a focus now, 868 01:24:02,426 --> 01:24:09,067 but it becomes more of a focus than it has been before, because it has this new element where 869 01:24:10,426 --> 01:24:15,947 before it was like a semi private way to transact permissionlessly. And all of a sudden, 870 01:24:15,947 --> 01:24:19,467 they you've taken the ball out of their hands completely. You know what I mean? 871 01:24:20,426 --> 01:24:29,627 Yeah. Yeah, those are all thoughts. So, you know, it kind of opens it up to a new, 872 01:24:31,227 --> 01:24:36,587 more focused attack by the state or more not attack, but you know, more, 873 01:24:37,146 --> 01:24:39,546 it's going to bring more attention than it has in the past. 874 01:24:39,627 --> 01:24:46,906 Well, those are all interesting thoughts. I mean, I personally don't have any desire to avoid 875 01:24:48,426 --> 01:24:55,386 surveillance myself. However, and of course, you know, we should all absolutely pay all our taxes, 876 01:24:55,386 --> 01:25:04,026 but for people who are political dissidents in other countries that unfortunately have a lot 877 01:25:04,107 --> 01:25:09,467 For people who are political dissidents in other countries that unfortunately have a lot of 878 01:25:09,467 --> 01:25:19,227 repression and statist, you know, excesses, like Russia, Iran, etc. People there benefit 879 01:25:19,227 --> 01:25:24,666 greatly from anonymity and self sovereignty for their safety and their financial freedom. 880 01:25:25,386 --> 01:25:31,067 So it's great for Bitcoin to adopt the absolute most extreme privacy possible 881 01:25:32,026 --> 01:25:37,627 that can safely be done on layer one. And if there is privacy technology that shouldn't be 882 01:25:37,627 --> 01:25:44,426 done on layer one because it's unstable, then the best course is for Bitcoin to have that on a layer 883 01:25:44,426 --> 01:25:54,666 two. So a great example of this is what I just put in the nest here. So I put a tweet in the nest, 884 01:25:54,827 --> 01:26:06,426 and this is Adam Back saying that he likes the Zcash sidechain, which is a drivechain created 885 01:26:06,426 --> 01:26:18,587 by the drivechain developers. So he writes Zcash protocol is a bit risky for Bitcoin main chain, 886 01:26:19,546 --> 01:26:26,186 but he likes it on a sidechain. He likes the drivechain version. He wrote, I would try and 887 01:26:26,186 --> 01:26:33,067 use the drivechain version. So he totally understands that when you do it on a sidechain, 888 01:26:33,067 --> 01:26:38,987 you're using Bitcoin and you're using Bitcoin in a partitioned manner where the experimental 889 01:26:38,987 --> 01:26:46,747 software, if it were to fail, wouldn't harm the main chain. So this is giving Bitcoiners opt 890 01:26:47,227 --> 01:26:54,186 in functionality. In the same way that people like to have lots of choices when they go to a store, 891 01:26:54,747 --> 01:26:59,227 Bitcoiners should have lots of choices within Bitcoin's sidechains 892 01:26:59,227 --> 01:27:04,906 for how they want to engage with technology, money, and blockchain. 893 01:27:06,906 --> 01:27:13,227 Thanks everyone for being here today. We had a pretty cozy crowd of brilliant people. Thank you 894 01:27:13,227 --> 01:27:18,987 for your questions. You've educated me a lot. The conversation has been good. I hope to see you all 895 01:27:18,987 --> 01:27:26,107 next time on Monday. These are drivechain Twitter spaces that are recorded and available on the 896 01:27:26,107 --> 01:27:32,506 LayerTwo Labs Twitter handle. We're working on doing a podcast where we'll put the spaces into 897 01:27:32,506 --> 01:27:38,026 podcast format and also have interviews with drivechain advocates like Fiatjaf, the creator of 898 01:27:38,026 --> 01:27:47,947 Nostr, and others. So we run every Monday and Thursday, 9.30am Pacific, and everyone's welcome 899 01:27:47,947 --> 01:27:53,786 to speak and ask questions. If you're listening to this on demand later as a recorded space, 900 01:27:54,426 --> 01:28:01,067 please know that you're welcome to come into the live rooms and ask your questions. We welcome 901 01:28:01,067 --> 01:28:08,666 criticism and careful reasoning so that we all can become smarter people on these topics. 902 01:28:10,266 --> 01:28:17,146 All right. Also, everyone's welcome to join the Telegram group and you can find the Telegram 903 01:28:17,146 --> 01:28:26,266 group at drivechain.info if you click on Telegram, the link there. And there's also a very good 904 01:28:26,266 --> 01:28:35,867 Discord. The Discord is called Second Layer. And the Second Layer Discord is a community for 905 01:28:37,467 --> 01:28:42,747 people interested in second layers on Bitcoin. These second layers can include drivechain 906 01:28:42,747 --> 01:28:50,266 as well as others like Rootstock and other ideas like Stacks and Blockstream's Liquid project. 907 01:28:51,227 --> 01:28:56,906 And it's a great community for bringing together all the thinkers and users and advocates and 908 01:28:56,906 --> 01:29:09,947 enthusiasts for that. So... Hey, Lairtu, can I just say that I also don't engage in illegal 909 01:29:09,947 --> 01:29:18,587 activities or dodge the IRS. But, you know, as you said, mentioned, it's still an important 910 01:29:19,546 --> 01:29:25,627 aspect of being able to transact. I thought you just said that you have lunch every weekend with 911 01:29:25,627 --> 01:29:32,026 Kim Jong-un and you and you have trouble paying him back on Venmo because his account has been 912 01:29:32,026 --> 01:29:37,867 blocked. Well, well, if he would just if he would tip better and I didn't have to leave a tip after 913 01:29:38,587 --> 01:29:44,827 it's his day day, you know. You were saying that you have trouble setting the Venmo. So 914 01:29:44,906 --> 01:29:48,747 and you're worried about privacy on Lightning being inferior. So you always use Zcash. 915 01:29:52,266 --> 01:29:55,786 Even though it's an altcoin and you wish you didn't have to resort to altcoining. 916 01:29:58,266 --> 01:30:05,386 Hey, good spaces, sir. Thank you. My pleasure. All right. See you all on Monday. Thanks again. 917 01:30:05,386 --> 01:30:11,947 Please come again. Bring your friends. Bye, everybody. Later.