1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:05,000 Gentlemen, thank you for joining us here, and thanks to a lovely audience for coming out for this talk. 2 00:00:05,000 --> 00:00:12,000 One of those things where it's a really kick-the-can-down-the-road issue, and a lot of people like to talk about it, some bloviate, 3 00:00:12,000 --> 00:00:18,000 a lot of sophistry in the discussion of what's going to happen when Bitcoin's block subsidy runs out. 4 00:00:18,000 --> 00:00:24,000 Before we get into the meat of the discussion, though, can you all give us some brief intros about who you are, the work you do in Bitcoin? 5 00:00:24,000 --> 00:00:33,000 Sure. My name is Paul Sztorc. I'm the author of BIPs 300 and 301, and I'm the founder and CEO of LayerTwo Labs. 6 00:00:33,000 --> 00:00:38,000 I'm Mike Casey, most recently with Mera, running the Enduro platform. 7 00:00:38,000 --> 00:00:42,000 Currently, I'm an independent working on post-quantum solutions. 8 00:00:42,000 --> 00:00:45,000 Hi, my name's Nick Hanson. I'm the CEO of Luxor. 9 00:00:45,000 --> 00:00:52,000 We build mining software services, mining pool, firmware, financial services, like derivatives and things like that. 10 00:00:52,000 --> 00:00:56,000 Very interested in what happens in a post-subsidy world. 11 00:00:56,000 --> 00:01:02,000 Yeah, and to set the stage for this, so for those who, if you're hearing the word subsidy and it's jargon to you, 12 00:01:02,000 --> 00:01:07,000 Bitcoin's block rewards have both a subsidy, which refresh them into coins and transaction fees. 13 00:01:07,000 --> 00:01:14,000 And so, with each success of having, that subsidy continues to diminish in Bitcoin terms, and eventually it will go away. 14 00:01:14,000 --> 00:01:20,000 Like what, like 2134, something like that? Long before, you know, long after we're all gone. 15 00:01:21,000 --> 00:01:28,000 So, but there is this concern that eventually you're going to get to a point where you're going to rely only on transaction fees, 16 00:01:28,000 --> 00:01:36,000 and if Bitcoin is not being used enough, if the transaction fees are not high enough, this could theoretically threaten Bitcoin's security budget. 17 00:01:36,000 --> 00:01:38,000 Because miners are not incentivized to mine. 18 00:01:38,000 --> 00:01:44,000 So, to kind of start, I would just say on a scale of one to ten, gentlemen, we'll start with you, Paul, and then move down. 19 00:01:44,000 --> 00:01:52,000 How concerned are you for that, the idea that once the subsidy is diminished, there won't be enough transaction fees to furnish Bitcoin mining? 20 00:01:53,000 --> 00:01:57,000 I would say an eight. Now, are we allowed to explain, or do we just do it? 21 00:01:57,000 --> 00:01:58,000 Yeah, absolutely. 22 00:01:58,000 --> 00:02:04,000 Okay, so first of all, even though it goes down 100% in the year 2140, it's already gone down. 23 00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:08,000 In the first 16 years, it goes down 96%, and then it goes down another 96%. 24 00:02:08,000 --> 00:02:13,000 So, it goes down very, very rapidly, and it just kind of barely survives until the end. 25 00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:17,000 So, it's going to be a concern long before the year 2140. 26 00:02:17,000 --> 00:02:23,000 And the reason to be concerned with the security budget is like there's several, there's like four different overlapping things. 27 00:02:23,000 --> 00:02:28,000 So, one of them is it's how much money the miners are paid, which is how much proof of work the network, 28 00:02:28,000 --> 00:02:32,000 this is how much money the miners will spend since they can't spend more than they're paid. 29 00:02:32,000 --> 00:02:35,000 And that's how much proof of work the network has. 30 00:02:35,000 --> 00:02:40,000 And if the network doesn't have proof of work, then all this blockchain stuff was just kind of a waste of time 31 00:02:40,000 --> 00:02:41,000 because it doesn't actually do anything. 32 00:02:41,000 --> 00:02:44,000 And I'm only going to explain the second reason out of four. 33 00:02:44,000 --> 00:02:48,000 But the second reason is that it's a clue that we have a lot of fee-paying users. 34 00:02:48,000 --> 00:02:50,000 We actually have happy customers. 35 00:02:50,000 --> 00:02:55,000 So, if the security budget is very high, it means we've got a lot of users actually using the network. 36 00:02:55,000 --> 00:02:59,000 And that is why we should really be focused. 37 00:02:59,000 --> 00:03:04,000 We should really be focused very much on how much revenue the miners are getting. 38 00:03:04,000 --> 00:03:09,000 We should care about that almost as much as we care about the exchange rate. 39 00:03:09,000 --> 00:03:11,000 To me? Yeah. 40 00:03:11,000 --> 00:03:18,000 My answer right now, it's probably about like a five, but it edges up every year. 41 00:03:18,000 --> 00:03:21,000 I think within six years' time, it'll be an eight. 42 00:03:21,000 --> 00:03:27,000 That's how long I think we have to fully assess the situation, take corrective action. 43 00:03:27,000 --> 00:03:33,000 The reason being for this, if you look at Monero, Monero, they have a tail emission. 44 00:03:33,000 --> 00:03:42,000 And they put a lot of work into that tail emission, and they're still regularly 51% attacked right now. 45 00:03:42,000 --> 00:03:48,000 In six years' time, another two halvings as a percentage of the total amount of emission of the coin, 46 00:03:48,000 --> 00:03:55,000 Bitcoin emission rate through the subsidy will actually be less than Monero's tail emission 47 00:03:55,000 --> 00:03:58,000 as a rate over the total amount being secured. 48 00:03:58,000 --> 00:04:03,000 So we don't have much time left, and it's not something anybody's thinking about. 49 00:04:03,000 --> 00:04:10,000 To me, mid to longer term, this is a more important issue than quantum itself. 50 00:04:10,000 --> 00:04:17,000 Yeah, so I would say what my concern level was like an eight or ten back in 2024, 51 00:04:17,000 --> 00:04:22,000 mostly because I'm just kind of thinking about the halving of probably 2032. 52 00:04:22,000 --> 00:04:25,000 We've seen all-time low hash price pretty consistently over this epoch. 53 00:04:25,000 --> 00:04:27,000 That probably isn't going away. 54 00:04:27,000 --> 00:04:32,000 And Paul said it the best, we need users, we need customers, people to use this thing. 55 00:04:32,000 --> 00:04:35,000 At the end of the day, it's a service to move money around. 56 00:04:35,000 --> 00:04:39,000 People need to be paying to use that, and right now nobody's really doing that. 57 00:04:39,000 --> 00:04:43,000 The last cohort of people that did were ordinals and runes people, 58 00:04:43,000 --> 00:04:48,000 putting JPEGs on the blockchain, which is a pretty toxic topic. 59 00:04:48,000 --> 00:04:51,000 But yeah, that was like the last time the chain really got any major usage. 60 00:04:51,000 --> 00:04:54,000 I mean, blocks are consistently not full right now. 61 00:04:54,000 --> 00:04:58,000 And actually the last time they were full was because of a weird ordinal thing. 62 00:04:58,000 --> 00:05:02,000 So we need users. We need people to actually move Bitcoin around, use it to pay for stuff. 63 00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:05,000 Or the subsidy is going to be a massive problem. 64 00:05:05,000 --> 00:05:09,000 I do disagree, though. I think quantum is the first thing we have to tackle, 65 00:05:09,000 --> 00:05:11,000 and then the subsidy is going to be a problem. 66 00:05:11,000 --> 00:05:17,000 You think we'll have a viable quantum computer that could threaten quantum vulnerable coins 67 00:05:17,000 --> 00:05:20,000 before the subsidy becomes an issue for minor revenue? 68 00:05:20,000 --> 00:05:22,000 Before the subsidy becomes a bigger issue, yeah. 69 00:05:22,000 --> 00:05:24,000 What's your timeline for that? 70 00:05:24,000 --> 00:05:28,000 I would say right now, I think the conservative estimate is about six years. 71 00:05:28,000 --> 00:05:30,000 And aggressive would be shorter than that. 72 00:05:30,000 --> 00:05:34,000 And then I think, or sorry, the consensus is about six years. 73 00:05:34,000 --> 00:05:36,000 An aggressive estimate would be more like four. 74 00:05:36,000 --> 00:05:40,000 And then if you were really conservative, you think that quantum is further out, 75 00:05:40,000 --> 00:05:41,000 would be more like nine. 76 00:05:41,000 --> 00:05:44,000 So between four and nine years is kind of the timeline. 77 00:05:44,000 --> 00:05:49,000 We can't escape from the quantum discussion, even when it's just a panel about subsidy. 78 00:05:49,000 --> 00:05:51,000 Nope, it never ends. 79 00:05:51,000 --> 00:05:55,000 Well, quantum fixes the subsidy problem for a while. 80 00:05:55,000 --> 00:05:57,000 You're getting ahead of my questions. 81 00:05:57,000 --> 00:05:58,000 Sorry. 82 00:05:58,000 --> 00:06:00,000 But, you know, we opened two cans of worms there. 83 00:06:00,000 --> 00:06:04,000 I'll start with that one second, but I want to first zoom in on one thing that you said about 84 00:06:04,000 --> 00:06:10,000 the last time we saw a meaningful spike in fees was the Ordinal's craze in 2023, 2024. 85 00:06:10,000 --> 00:06:12,000 And it was significant. 86 00:06:12,000 --> 00:06:17,000 There were times where, you know, you had 30, 40, 50 percent, 87 00:06:17,000 --> 00:06:22,000 sometimes 100 percent even of the block subsidy as fees because of this Ordinal's trading. 88 00:06:22,000 --> 00:06:26,000 And when all of that was going off, it was obviously very contentious. 89 00:06:26,000 --> 00:06:30,000 A lot of people don't like the blockchain being used for non-monetary use cases. 90 00:06:30,000 --> 00:06:33,000 But there was dialogue. It did spark a dialogue over. 91 00:06:33,000 --> 00:06:38,000 Well, eventually we're going to need use cases that feed the fee market or else mining will die. 92 00:06:38,000 --> 00:06:44,000 And so for my next question, we'll start with you this time, Nick, and then move down. 93 00:06:44,000 --> 00:06:49,000 People have been talking about different L2s on Bitcoin, unlocking, you know, 94 00:06:49,000 --> 00:06:51,000 DeFi use cases on Bitcoin for a long time. 95 00:06:51,000 --> 00:06:56,000 During the Ordinal's craze, there was gobs of fundraising into some of these budding L2s. 96 00:06:56,000 --> 00:07:01,000 And just frankly speaking, a lot of them have failed to deliver any sort of market share 97 00:07:01,000 --> 00:07:03,000 that would mirror what we've seen on Ethereum. 98 00:07:03,000 --> 00:07:07,000 So what do you think is the reason why we haven't seen that adoption? 99 00:07:07,000 --> 00:07:12,000 Do you think that L2s and alternative or additional financial uses of Bitcoin 100 00:07:12,000 --> 00:07:15,000 that would drive fees are something that's just not sticky for this asset? 101 00:07:15,000 --> 00:07:18,000 And if that's so, why is that? Nick, we'll start with you. 102 00:07:18,000 --> 00:07:24,000 At the end of the day, you need a fork to really have usable L2s to get what's called unilateral exit, 103 00:07:24,000 --> 00:07:29,000 meaning you can exit from the L2 without having to have any validators in between. 104 00:07:29,000 --> 00:07:33,000 You need a fork to make that possible, and they've determined that a fork is not going to happen. 105 00:07:33,000 --> 00:07:36,000 So that's kind of, you know, I mean, when I say they, 106 00:07:36,000 --> 00:07:39,000 I mean the community has pretty much rejected all of those proposals. 107 00:07:39,000 --> 00:07:43,000 CTV, Checksick from Stack, Opcat, you've probably heard of these. 108 00:07:43,000 --> 00:07:46,000 They're really not going anywhere as far as I can tell. 109 00:07:46,000 --> 00:07:49,000 So you need a fork for them to happen, and I don't think that that's going to happen, 110 00:07:49,000 --> 00:07:52,000 at least not in this generation of Bitcoiners. 111 00:07:52,000 --> 00:07:55,000 I think Taproot was probably the last real fork that we'll get. 112 00:07:55,000 --> 00:07:58,000 The next one we would really need to do is Bit360. 113 00:07:58,000 --> 00:08:01,000 So we're not going to get like any new opcodes to allow real L2 activity. 114 00:08:01,000 --> 00:08:08,000 So at the end of the day, I don't think there's going to be much DeFi activity on Bitcoin, unfortunately. 115 00:08:08,000 --> 00:08:13,000 Which is good. We want DeFi activity on Bitcoin. It drives a lot of fees. 116 00:08:13,000 --> 00:08:18,000 So I agree with you on the outcome, but I disagree on the reason. 117 00:08:18,000 --> 00:08:21,000 I don't think it's necessarily because of these proposals. 118 00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:26,000 The reason, I think, that we're not seeing any kind of appreciable fee market develop, 119 00:08:26,000 --> 00:08:29,000 and we'll see something like Ordinals pop every now and again. 120 00:08:29,000 --> 00:08:33,000 We saw the Lightning Network and lots of usage on that for a while. 121 00:08:33,000 --> 00:08:36,000 And the same is true of ARK or anything else. 122 00:08:37,000 --> 00:08:43,000 It all kind of boils down to the fact that we have a static cap on the amount of block space, 123 00:08:43,000 --> 00:08:45,000 and it's in no way adaptive. 124 00:08:45,000 --> 00:08:49,000 So the problem, and I know this is a very controversial take, 125 00:08:49,000 --> 00:08:55,000 but the problem with this is somebody develops a killer app use case to use Bitcoin for, 126 00:08:55,000 --> 00:08:58,000 other than just sending transactions. 127 00:08:58,000 --> 00:09:01,000 And they try to do it. They build up a model. 128 00:09:01,000 --> 00:09:04,000 They have something like Runes or Ordinals, and they do it. 129 00:09:04,000 --> 00:09:06,000 And it is wildly successful. 130 00:09:06,000 --> 00:09:10,000 But eventually that use case will price itself out of the market 131 00:09:10,000 --> 00:09:14,000 because the supply of block space does not increase ever. 132 00:09:14,000 --> 00:09:18,000 So because of that, it becomes far too expensive to support that use case. 133 00:09:18,000 --> 00:09:22,000 This is true for anything you want to do as a meta protocol on Bitcoin, 134 00:09:22,000 --> 00:09:27,000 including bridging mechanisms to a DeFi protocol on ML2. 135 00:09:27,000 --> 00:09:31,000 So this is a problem for Lightning. This is a problem for Ordinals. 136 00:09:31,000 --> 00:09:38,000 This is a problem for ARK or any other system that requires Bitcoin transactions for it to use. 137 00:09:38,000 --> 00:09:42,000 Eventually its own weight will crush it under the current way. 138 00:09:44,000 --> 00:09:50,000 Okay, we could easily have a huge ecosystem that pays miners an enormous amount of fees, 139 00:09:50,000 --> 00:09:57,000 and much, much more, 10,000 or 100,000 times what they earn today. 140 00:09:57,000 --> 00:10:03,000 But for some reason, the Bitcoin community has chosen not to do anything controversial. 141 00:10:03,000 --> 00:10:06,000 And so even the Ordinals is a perfect example, 142 00:10:06,000 --> 00:10:09,000 because the Ordinals is a case where people are kind of using Bitcoin to have fun. 143 00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:15,000 But exactly as Mike was saying, it caused the fee rates to go up in 2023. 144 00:10:15,000 --> 00:10:20,000 And that interfered with some Lightning technology and some other stuff. 145 00:10:20,000 --> 00:10:23,000 So it's just very hard to get anything done, 146 00:10:23,000 --> 00:10:30,000 because if you do anything at all, it's bound to make some people sort of confused or upset. 147 00:10:30,000 --> 00:10:34,000 And so basically every single decision you could possibly make is controversial. 148 00:10:34,000 --> 00:10:37,000 And we've decided that we're not going to do anything controversial, 149 00:10:37,000 --> 00:10:42,000 so that we could have, for example, unlimited extra block space on these merge mine L2s. 150 00:10:42,000 --> 00:10:46,000 And that's what the sidechain's idea was, and that's what BIP300 is. 151 00:10:46,000 --> 00:10:51,000 I agree with Nick that we're not going to have BIP300 on BTC anytime soon. 152 00:10:51,000 --> 00:10:55,000 We're not going to have OPCAT. We're not going to have OPCTV. 153 00:10:55,000 --> 00:11:00,000 We used to do two soft forks on average every year. 154 00:11:00,000 --> 00:11:04,000 We did 14 in the first seven years, but now we don't do any at all. 155 00:11:04,000 --> 00:11:09,000 And Taproot took 46 months from when it was first proposed to when it finally activated. 156 00:11:09,000 --> 00:11:15,000 So we could easily change all this around. 157 00:11:15,000 --> 00:11:21,000 The Bitcoin culture and the way we do things here, we just don't prioritize users, 158 00:11:21,000 --> 00:11:25,000 and we just don't prioritize the fees. So we could do it. 159 00:11:25,000 --> 00:11:28,000 But in one sense, nothing is stopping us from doing that. 160 00:11:28,000 --> 00:11:32,000 But in another sense, it's just we kind of collectively decided as a culture 161 00:11:32,000 --> 00:11:34,000 that we're just not going to do it, which is a big mistake. 162 00:11:34,000 --> 00:11:38,000 But I have one final thing to say, which is, see, you're running a pool. 163 00:11:38,000 --> 00:11:41,000 Nick is running one of the pools, one of the big pools. 164 00:11:41,000 --> 00:11:43,000 It's not that big, but it's on the pie chart. 165 00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:44,000 Bro! 166 00:11:44,000 --> 00:11:49,000 So you guys are the responsible party in a way. 167 00:11:49,000 --> 00:11:53,000 You guys are the specialists. You guys run the block template. 168 00:11:53,000 --> 00:11:55,000 You guys can orphan blocks. 169 00:11:55,000 --> 00:11:57,000 So you could call up your other pool friends, 170 00:11:57,000 --> 00:11:59,000 and you could activate all these soft forks tomorrow. 171 00:11:59,000 --> 00:12:02,000 I'm just saying, partially this is the mining pool's decision 172 00:12:02,000 --> 00:12:05,000 to just fire a gun into their own skull and end their own lives. 173 00:12:05,000 --> 00:12:08,000 So that is one weird aspect about it. 174 00:12:08,000 --> 00:12:11,000 That's akin to a coup, though, in a way. 175 00:12:12,000 --> 00:12:16,000 It's a coup to basically keep themselves alive 176 00:12:16,000 --> 00:12:20,000 and keep the Bitcoin network growing and obtaining more users, I think. 177 00:12:20,000 --> 00:12:21,000 But I agree with you. 178 00:12:21,000 --> 00:12:24,000 He's right, because this is the element in the culture 179 00:12:24,000 --> 00:12:27,000 that it's for anyone to just do anything unilaterally 180 00:12:27,000 --> 00:12:32,000 is seen as a kind of betrayal of the peace and tranquility 181 00:12:32,000 --> 00:12:35,000 that we've all enjoyed for the last whatever. 182 00:12:35,000 --> 00:12:39,000 If I can jump in, the problem, I think, is because of the halvings. 183 00:12:39,000 --> 00:12:43,000 It's basically we're a frog in a boiling pot of water, 184 00:12:43,000 --> 00:12:48,000 and the temperature's going up really slowly, really slowly, really slowly. 185 00:12:48,000 --> 00:12:51,000 And so nobody's concerned about the fee market right now 186 00:12:51,000 --> 00:12:53,000 because there's a subsidy. 187 00:12:53,000 --> 00:12:58,000 And everybody assumes, oh, okay, well, if the price doubles 188 00:12:58,000 --> 00:13:02,000 and the Bitcoin subsidy halves, well, that's net-net. 189 00:13:02,000 --> 00:13:03,000 Everything's even. 190 00:13:03,000 --> 00:13:04,000 A lot of people believe that, 191 00:13:04,000 --> 00:13:06,000 but I think all four of us know that that's not true. 192 00:13:06,000 --> 00:13:07,000 That's not the way it works. 193 00:13:08,000 --> 00:13:10,000 Or take out a piece of paper and start multiplying, 194 00:13:10,000 --> 00:13:12,000 and you'll see that doesn't work. 195 00:13:12,000 --> 00:13:15,000 So the security budget, in actuality, 196 00:13:15,000 --> 00:13:19,000 needs to be one Satoshi more than the attack budget. 197 00:13:19,000 --> 00:13:23,000 So Bitcoin always must be profitable to mine with your hash. 198 00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:27,000 If you can acquire hash, it has to be more profitable to mine with it 199 00:13:27,000 --> 00:13:29,000 than it is to try to attack Bitcoin. 200 00:13:29,000 --> 00:13:33,000 The more expensive Bitcoin gets, the more value it has, 201 00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:35,000 the more attractive target it is for attack. 202 00:13:35,000 --> 00:13:37,000 So it actually does not help. 203 00:13:37,000 --> 00:13:40,000 The number to go up does not help the problem. 204 00:13:41,000 --> 00:13:42,000 I thought you were going to say something, Paul. 205 00:13:42,000 --> 00:13:44,000 This is kind of a tough panel, guys, 206 00:13:44,000 --> 00:13:46,000 because you all have said something just now 207 00:13:46,000 --> 00:13:49,000 that I could latch onto for a follow-up conversation. 208 00:13:49,000 --> 00:13:53,000 Like, for instance, Mike, you kind of hinted at this catch-22 209 00:13:53,000 --> 00:13:54,000 with Bitcoin's block space, 210 00:13:54,000 --> 00:13:59,000 this idea that there's not actually big enough to furnish the use cases 211 00:13:59,000 --> 00:14:03,000 that would drive fees in a way that doesn't hamper other use cases, 212 00:14:03,000 --> 00:14:04,000 like Paul was saying. 213 00:14:04,000 --> 00:14:06,000 For instance, when the ordinal's craze was popping off, 214 00:14:06,000 --> 00:14:08,000 people would be running lightning routing nodes, 215 00:14:08,000 --> 00:14:11,000 and they would close channels or have channels forced closed, 216 00:14:11,000 --> 00:14:14,000 and all of their revenue from that routing node was gone 217 00:14:14,000 --> 00:14:16,000 because fees were crazy. 218 00:14:16,000 --> 00:14:18,000 Anyway, that kind of struck me. 219 00:14:18,000 --> 00:14:21,000 If you build anything with the assumption that fees will eventually be cheap enough, 220 00:14:21,000 --> 00:14:23,000 then you're going to lose all your money. 221 00:14:23,000 --> 00:14:24,000 Right, right. 222 00:14:24,000 --> 00:14:26,000 Anyway, that kind of struck me as just a fee, 223 00:14:26,000 --> 00:14:28,000 and I just wanted to point it out. 224 00:14:28,000 --> 00:14:31,000 And I would like to get back to the developer discussion in a second 225 00:14:31,000 --> 00:14:34,000 in terms of thinking about what quantum means 226 00:14:34,000 --> 00:14:36,000 for threatening any other opcode being added 227 00:14:36,000 --> 00:14:38,000 that would actually improve functionality. 228 00:14:38,000 --> 00:14:42,000 But first, I do want to return to quantum in a different element with you, Mike, 229 00:14:42,000 --> 00:14:46,000 specifically this hourglass proposal that you co-authored. 230 00:14:46,000 --> 00:14:48,000 Can you explain to people what this is 231 00:14:48,000 --> 00:14:54,000 and also how it might, as a side effect, solve this problem? 232 00:14:54,000 --> 00:14:55,000 Yeah, sure. 233 00:14:55,000 --> 00:14:58,000 Taking time, I'll try to be brief. 234 00:14:59,000 --> 00:15:04,000 I'm sure most people are familiar with Satoshi's coins, this vast trove, 235 00:15:04,000 --> 00:15:06,000 and most people aren't worried about them. 236 00:15:06,000 --> 00:15:08,000 They've been written off so thoroughly 237 00:15:08,000 --> 00:15:13,000 because they haven't moved since 2011 or earlier, 2010. 238 00:15:13,000 --> 00:15:16,000 This represents a whole class of coins. 239 00:15:16,000 --> 00:15:20,000 It's P2PK, noticeably not P2PKH. 240 00:15:20,000 --> 00:15:22,000 It's not protected by that hash element, 241 00:15:22,000 --> 00:15:26,000 which means these coins exist on-chain with a public key exposed, 242 00:15:26,000 --> 00:15:28,000 and they are 100% quantum vulnerable 243 00:15:28,000 --> 00:15:31,000 to a cryptographically relevant quantum computer. 244 00:15:31,000 --> 00:15:35,000 That means somebody could, with any amount of time, 245 00:15:35,000 --> 00:15:39,000 they can crack them with a sufficient quantum computer 246 00:15:39,000 --> 00:15:41,000 running Shor's algorithm. 247 00:15:41,000 --> 00:15:43,000 These coins are exposed. 248 00:15:43,000 --> 00:15:45,000 They're presumed dead, 249 00:15:45,000 --> 00:15:48,000 so nobody's going to move them and migrate them over. 250 00:15:48,000 --> 00:15:50,000 Let's say we activate bit 360. 251 00:15:50,000 --> 00:15:52,000 Let's say we have post-quantum cryptography. Great. It's all safe. 252 00:15:52,000 --> 00:15:54,000 Nobody's going to move those coins. 253 00:15:54,000 --> 00:15:56,000 They're going to be there, presumably forever, 254 00:15:56,000 --> 00:15:59,000 until a quantum attacker steals it. 255 00:15:59,000 --> 00:16:02,000 We did the math looking into this, 256 00:16:02,000 --> 00:16:08,000 and it would take 1.7 million bitcoin, not dollars. 257 00:16:08,000 --> 00:16:11,000 1.7 million bitcoins are in this class. 258 00:16:11,000 --> 00:16:16,000 The original ones, 50 BTC per pop mining rewards. 259 00:16:16,000 --> 00:16:21,000 These coins could be moved by a single entity 260 00:16:21,000 --> 00:16:26,000 if they pre-cracked the entire set in three hours' time. 261 00:16:26,000 --> 00:16:29,000 That's how long it would take a quantum attacker 262 00:16:29,000 --> 00:16:32,000 to actually mine all of those into an address 263 00:16:32,000 --> 00:16:34,000 they control outright under whatever. 264 00:16:34,000 --> 00:16:37,000 Presumably, they could even flood them onto the market 265 00:16:37,000 --> 00:16:39,000 and crash the entire market. 266 00:16:39,000 --> 00:16:42,000 That is the problem statement. 267 00:16:42,000 --> 00:16:44,000 There are factions who say, 268 00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:46,000 well, we can't allow this. 269 00:16:46,000 --> 00:16:48,000 Those coins are supposed to be dormant. 270 00:16:48,000 --> 00:16:50,000 They're supposed to be dead. That's not what I bought into. 271 00:16:50,000 --> 00:16:53,000 We should freeze or burn these coins. 272 00:16:53,000 --> 00:16:57,000 That would mean freezing or burning Satoshi's coins, 273 00:16:57,000 --> 00:16:58,000 amongst others. 274 00:16:58,000 --> 00:17:00,000 I think that's kind of an anathema 275 00:17:00,000 --> 00:17:05,000 to what bitcoin represents and property rights. 276 00:17:05,000 --> 00:17:08,000 You have the one side, which are the liquidationists. 277 00:17:08,000 --> 00:17:11,000 Liquidationists say, not your keys, not your coin. 278 00:17:11,000 --> 00:17:14,000 If they get the keys, it's theirs. This is freedom. 279 00:17:14,000 --> 00:17:18,000 The other side says, no, we have to protect. 280 00:17:18,000 --> 00:17:20,000 What Hourglass is, 281 00:17:20,000 --> 00:17:23,000 is it's a compromise solution between these two camps. 282 00:17:23,000 --> 00:17:26,000 The original Hourglass proposal, 283 00:17:26,000 --> 00:17:29,000 one output, one P2PK output, 284 00:17:29,000 --> 00:17:31,000 was allowable per block. 285 00:17:31,000 --> 00:17:36,000 That means 50 BTC could be released per block, 286 00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:39,000 which means it would take about eight months 287 00:17:39,000 --> 00:17:42,000 to run through that supply, as opposed to three hours. 288 00:17:42,000 --> 00:17:46,000 The most recent version, Hourglass V2, 289 00:17:46,000 --> 00:17:48,000 that actually stretches it out, 290 00:17:48,000 --> 00:17:51,000 because it only allows one BTC to be released 291 00:17:51,000 --> 00:17:53,000 from one of these addresses per block. 292 00:17:53,000 --> 00:17:58,000 That actually stretches it out over 32 years. 293 00:17:58,000 --> 00:18:00,000 Getting back to your original point, 294 00:18:00,000 --> 00:18:02,000 because I know this took a long time to get there, 295 00:18:02,000 --> 00:18:04,000 but getting back to your original point, 296 00:18:04,000 --> 00:18:07,000 how does this affect the security budget? 297 00:18:07,000 --> 00:18:11,000 Well, if the stars aligned and everything went right, 298 00:18:11,000 --> 00:18:13,000 and there actually was a credible quantum threat 299 00:18:13,000 --> 00:18:16,000 in the near-term future, and Hourglass was activated, 300 00:18:16,000 --> 00:18:20,000 and they did attack these coins as a salvage right, 301 00:18:20,000 --> 00:18:23,000 because they're unclaimed property at this point, 302 00:18:23,000 --> 00:18:26,000 and it was legitimized, so they weren't incentivized 303 00:18:26,000 --> 00:18:28,000 to steal other sets of unprotected coins, 304 00:18:28,000 --> 00:18:30,000 and everybody else moved those over. 305 00:18:30,000 --> 00:18:33,000 Well then, if there's one attacker, 306 00:18:33,000 --> 00:18:36,000 then they get all those coins. 307 00:18:36,000 --> 00:18:39,000 They get one BTC per block, or 144 bitcoins a day, 308 00:18:39,000 --> 00:18:41,000 which is not that bad. 309 00:18:41,000 --> 00:18:44,000 The second, and this is over the course of 32 years, 310 00:18:44,000 --> 00:18:46,000 if Satoshi doesn't move his coins, 311 00:18:46,000 --> 00:18:50,000 the second attacker now has to bid against the first one, 312 00:18:50,000 --> 00:18:53,000 and this creates an incentive. 313 00:18:53,000 --> 00:18:56,000 It's a race condition, 314 00:18:56,000 --> 00:18:58,000 because they have to pay the miners. 315 00:18:58,000 --> 00:19:01,000 They have to pay the mining pools. 316 00:19:01,000 --> 00:19:03,000 And just to be, for context, 317 00:19:03,000 --> 00:19:06,000 they would be doing an RBF or a place-by-few? 318 00:19:06,000 --> 00:19:10,000 No, not an RBF, because it's not the same transaction, right? 319 00:19:10,000 --> 00:19:12,000 There's only one allowable transaction. 320 00:19:12,000 --> 00:19:14,000 The miner picks which one. 321 00:19:14,000 --> 00:19:16,000 They're only allowed to pick one, 322 00:19:16,000 --> 00:19:18,000 and that one can be at max one bitcoin out. 323 00:19:18,000 --> 00:19:20,000 The rest has to be refunded to the address. 324 00:19:20,000 --> 00:19:22,000 So it's not necessarily an RBF, but similar characteristics. 325 00:19:22,000 --> 00:19:24,000 But it would be a fee-bidding war for those? 326 00:19:24,000 --> 00:19:26,000 A fee-bidding war, yes. 327 00:19:26,000 --> 00:19:28,000 And then those fees would go to the miners, 328 00:19:28,000 --> 00:19:30,000 and it would be a way to increase their revenue? 329 00:19:30,000 --> 00:19:31,000 Yes. 330 00:19:31,000 --> 00:19:33,000 You would effectively guarantee that there's 331 00:19:33,000 --> 00:19:37,000 one bitcoin worth of fees paid in each block? 332 00:19:37,000 --> 00:19:39,000 Yes, provided you have enough parties 333 00:19:39,000 --> 00:19:41,000 bidding against each other for this. 334 00:19:41,000 --> 00:19:43,000 This is my question, because this assumes 335 00:19:43,000 --> 00:19:46,000 that one of them just doesn't give up at one point, right? 336 00:19:46,000 --> 00:19:47,000 Well, it depends. 337 00:19:47,000 --> 00:19:49,000 If you already have the keys cracked, 338 00:19:49,000 --> 00:19:50,000 it's a sunk cost. 339 00:19:50,000 --> 00:19:53,000 If you get 1% of a bitcoin, 340 00:19:53,000 --> 00:19:55,000 that's better than getting nothing, right? 341 00:19:55,000 --> 00:19:57,000 So if you've already spent the effort to crack the key, 342 00:19:57,000 --> 00:19:59,000 would you rather get nothing for it, 343 00:19:59,000 --> 00:20:01,000 or get something for it? 344 00:20:01,000 --> 00:20:03,000 Welcome to Predict. 345 00:20:03,000 --> 00:20:05,000 The world is a market. 346 00:20:06,000 --> 00:20:08,000 Everything is a market. 347 00:20:08,000 --> 00:20:10,000 Every headline moves the line. 348 00:20:10,000 --> 00:20:12,000 Every moment is your market. 349 00:20:13,000 --> 00:20:15,000 Call the moves. 350 00:20:16,000 --> 00:20:18,000 Bet on your instinct. 351 00:20:20,000 --> 00:20:21,000 Your prediction. 352 00:20:21,000 --> 00:20:22,000 Your edge. 353 00:20:23,000 --> 00:20:24,000 Dual Bits. 354 00:20:24,000 --> 00:20:25,000 Predict. 355 00:20:25,000 --> 00:20:27,000 Where everything is a market. 356 00:20:28,000 --> 00:20:30,000 You presented on this at OpNext, 357 00:20:30,000 --> 00:20:33,000 BlockSpace's conference in New York last week, 358 00:20:33,000 --> 00:20:35,000 or two weeks ago. 359 00:20:35,000 --> 00:20:37,000 What are your thoughts on this as a miner? 360 00:20:37,000 --> 00:20:39,000 And then Paul will go to you for your thoughts. 361 00:20:39,000 --> 00:20:41,000 Yeah, I mean, I'm going to be advocating 362 00:20:41,000 --> 00:20:42,000 pretty heavily for it. 363 00:20:42,000 --> 00:20:45,000 Yeah, the OpNext conference presented by BlockSpace 364 00:20:45,000 --> 00:20:46,000 was a great conference. 365 00:20:46,000 --> 00:20:47,000 Thank you, Colin. 366 00:20:47,000 --> 00:20:49,000 And so when I was at OpNext, 367 00:20:49,000 --> 00:20:50,000 presented by BlockSpace, 368 00:20:50,000 --> 00:20:52,000 yeah, we talked a lot about Hourglass, 369 00:20:52,000 --> 00:20:54,000 and I think that, you know, 370 00:20:54,000 --> 00:20:55,000 Yeah, we talked a lot about Hourglass, 371 00:20:55,000 --> 00:20:57,000 and I think that, you know, 372 00:20:57,000 --> 00:20:58,000 it was actually well-received. 373 00:20:58,000 --> 00:20:59,000 I actually thought that I was going to get 374 00:20:59,000 --> 00:21:01,000 a lot of boos from the crowd, 375 00:21:01,000 --> 00:21:03,000 because that's like a hardcore Bitcoiner, 376 00:21:03,000 --> 00:21:05,000 like Bitcoin core kind of dev conference. 377 00:21:05,000 --> 00:21:08,000 And I expected that the majority of the folks 378 00:21:08,000 --> 00:21:09,000 there would really not like it, 379 00:21:09,000 --> 00:21:11,000 but it seemed like it was well-received. 380 00:21:11,000 --> 00:21:12,000 So I was pretty excited. 381 00:21:12,000 --> 00:21:14,000 I mean, it feels like there's actually 382 00:21:14,000 --> 00:21:16,000 real possibility that we could get 383 00:21:16,000 --> 00:21:17,000 an Hourglass fork in. 384 00:21:17,000 --> 00:21:19,000 Some would say it's better than 361. 385 00:21:19,000 --> 00:21:20,000 Oh, yeah. 386 00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:22,000 So 361 is the proposal to freeze 387 00:21:22,000 --> 00:21:24,000 any of the coins that are quantum susceptible 388 00:21:24,000 --> 00:21:25,000 after some date, 389 00:21:25,000 --> 00:21:28,000 which is, you know, basically the seizure. 390 00:21:28,000 --> 00:21:29,000 I don't advocate for that. 391 00:21:29,000 --> 00:21:32,000 I think that's antithetical to Bitcoin. 392 00:21:32,000 --> 00:21:34,000 I don't think that's the way that we should go. 393 00:21:34,000 --> 00:21:37,000 I'm also, I am very concerned about, 394 00:21:37,000 --> 00:21:39,000 you know, option one, which is do nothing, 395 00:21:39,000 --> 00:21:42,000 because it will demolish the market. 396 00:21:42,000 --> 00:21:44,000 And it'll be who knows how long 397 00:21:44,000 --> 00:21:45,000 until the market reforms. 398 00:21:45,000 --> 00:21:47,000 It could take decades. 399 00:21:47,000 --> 00:21:49,000 And the problem is, 400 00:21:49,000 --> 00:21:51,000 I want to be around to see Bitcoin 401 00:21:51,000 --> 00:21:52,000 hyper-Bitcoinization. 402 00:21:52,000 --> 00:21:54,000 And if they demolish the market 403 00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:56,000 and, you know, all these coins, 404 00:21:56,000 --> 00:21:58,000 you know, there's actually 6.7 million coins. 405 00:21:58,000 --> 00:21:59,000 It's a whole thing, 406 00:21:59,000 --> 00:22:02,000 but that are susceptible to being stolen. 407 00:22:02,000 --> 00:22:03,000 If that hits the market, 408 00:22:03,000 --> 00:22:05,000 like it's never coming back, 409 00:22:05,000 --> 00:22:06,000 probably not in my lifetime. 410 00:22:06,000 --> 00:22:08,000 Institutions are just out there. 411 00:22:08,000 --> 00:22:10,000 Like, I don't know really what happened here. 412 00:22:10,000 --> 00:22:12,000 Bitcoin went down by 90% in two days. 413 00:22:12,000 --> 00:22:14,000 I'm out. I just am out. 414 00:22:14,000 --> 00:22:15,000 So I don't know what to do about that. 415 00:22:15,000 --> 00:22:16,000 And so I think that Hourglass 416 00:22:16,000 --> 00:22:17,000 is really a great solution 417 00:22:17,000 --> 00:22:20,000 to slow that trickle and potentially, 418 00:22:20,000 --> 00:22:21,000 you know, have the majority of those coins, 419 00:22:21,000 --> 00:22:24,000 which are inevitably going to be stolen anyway, 420 00:22:24,000 --> 00:22:26,000 flow to miners who are most asset aligned. 421 00:22:28,000 --> 00:22:31,000 Hourglass is, I think, a pretty good idea. 422 00:22:31,000 --> 00:22:32,000 It does have two drawbacks 423 00:22:32,000 --> 00:22:34,000 with respect to the security budget. 424 00:22:34,000 --> 00:22:36,000 One is it requires that the quantum computer 425 00:22:36,000 --> 00:22:37,000 actually be built, 426 00:22:37,000 --> 00:22:41,000 which is not a foregone conclusion. 427 00:22:41,000 --> 00:22:42,000 It may not actually be built. 428 00:22:42,000 --> 00:22:43,000 You don't think so? 429 00:22:43,000 --> 00:22:44,000 You don't think it's a foregone conclusion? 430 00:22:44,000 --> 00:22:46,000 I think that a lot of people are weighing in, 431 00:22:46,000 --> 00:22:48,000 but very few people know. 432 00:22:48,000 --> 00:22:50,000 So I would be in favor of a prediction market 433 00:22:50,000 --> 00:22:51,000 or something that would say, 434 00:22:51,000 --> 00:22:53,000 like, will it be built by this date or something 435 00:22:53,000 --> 00:22:55,000 so that the insiders can tell us. 436 00:22:55,000 --> 00:22:58,000 I actually take that as another argument for Hourglass. 437 00:22:58,000 --> 00:23:00,000 Sorry to get you off, Paul. 438 00:23:00,000 --> 00:23:01,000 Because if it is, 439 00:23:01,000 --> 00:23:02,000 I'll let you do your second point. 440 00:23:02,000 --> 00:23:05,000 But versus a confiscation, 441 00:23:05,000 --> 00:23:06,000 if a confiscation, 442 00:23:06,000 --> 00:23:08,000 if you implement it early, 443 00:23:08,000 --> 00:23:10,000 you have to time it right before a quantum attack. 444 00:23:10,000 --> 00:23:12,000 Otherwise it's worthless 445 00:23:12,000 --> 00:23:14,000 and you've wasted everything. 446 00:23:14,000 --> 00:23:16,000 Hourglass, if it's enacted early 447 00:23:16,000 --> 00:23:17,000 and there is no quantum computer, 448 00:23:17,000 --> 00:23:19,000 it's minimal harm. 449 00:23:19,000 --> 00:23:22,000 Because anybody who wants to recover those keys still can. 450 00:23:22,000 --> 00:23:24,000 Yeah, you can still spend one BTC per week, 451 00:23:24,000 --> 00:23:25,000 which is kind of a lot of money. 452 00:23:25,000 --> 00:23:27,000 Sorry to interrupt your second point. 453 00:23:27,000 --> 00:23:29,000 I think it's still a very good idea. 454 00:23:29,000 --> 00:23:31,000 It does require that the quantum computer be built 455 00:23:31,000 --> 00:23:32,000 and crack all the keys 456 00:23:32,000 --> 00:23:34,000 and that they be posted on a website 457 00:23:34,000 --> 00:23:37,000 or just anyone can do it with a cheap quantum computer. 458 00:23:37,000 --> 00:23:38,000 The other problem is that 459 00:23:38,000 --> 00:23:40,000 when all those coins have been spent, 460 00:23:40,000 --> 00:23:42,000 now we've kicked the can down the road. 461 00:23:42,000 --> 00:23:45,000 We have this artificial one BTC per week subsidy 462 00:23:45,000 --> 00:23:48,000 and then it will just fall off a cliff to zero 463 00:23:48,000 --> 00:23:49,000 at the end of the third. 464 00:23:49,000 --> 00:23:51,000 Well, there's nothing prohibiting a future soft fork 465 00:23:51,000 --> 00:23:55,000 to smooth it later. 466 00:23:55,000 --> 00:23:57,000 But I don't advocate that initially. 467 00:23:57,000 --> 00:23:58,000 I'd just like to quickly say 468 00:23:58,000 --> 00:24:01,000 that I'm in favor of merge-mined L2s 469 00:24:01,000 --> 00:24:03,000 and that's what the 301 are. 470 00:24:03,000 --> 00:24:07,000 We could have an unlimited number of L2 blockchains 471 00:24:07,000 --> 00:24:09,000 and the miners could automatically collect 472 00:24:09,000 --> 00:24:11,000 the transaction fees from all of them 473 00:24:11,000 --> 00:24:12,000 without doing any extra work. 474 00:24:12,000 --> 00:24:14,000 And that would enable them to collect, 475 00:24:14,000 --> 00:24:17,000 again, huge amounts of money. 476 00:24:17,000 --> 00:24:19,000 For example, there used to be this site. 477 00:24:19,000 --> 00:24:20,000 There still is. 478 00:24:20,000 --> 00:24:22,000 It's called cryptofees.info. 479 00:24:22,000 --> 00:24:25,000 You can look up all the transaction fees paid, 480 00:24:25,000 --> 00:24:27,000 basically the security budget, more or less, 481 00:24:27,000 --> 00:24:29,000 paid by each blockchain. 482 00:24:29,000 --> 00:24:30,000 And you see that Ethereum, 483 00:24:30,000 --> 00:24:32,000 the number is always higher than BTC. 484 00:24:32,000 --> 00:24:34,000 Sometimes it's 10 times as much. 485 00:24:34,000 --> 00:24:36,000 So that's just something to think about, 486 00:24:36,000 --> 00:24:39,000 that we could have those with merge-mined L2s. 487 00:24:39,000 --> 00:24:40,000 All righty, gentlemen. 488 00:24:40,000 --> 00:24:42,000 We got two minutes, 45 seconds left. 489 00:24:42,000 --> 00:24:43,000 Quick lightning round. 490 00:24:43,000 --> 00:24:45,000 One of the solutions outside of transaction fees 491 00:24:45,000 --> 00:24:47,000 getting juiced up to this problem 492 00:24:47,000 --> 00:24:50,000 has been the idea of extending Bitcoin's emission schedule. 493 00:24:50,000 --> 00:24:53,000 Tail emissions, basically extending the block subsidy 494 00:24:53,000 --> 00:24:55,000 in perpetuity. 495 00:24:55,000 --> 00:24:57,000 What do y'all think of this proposal 496 00:24:57,000 --> 00:25:00,000 and why do you think it is or isn't a good solution? 497 00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:02,000 I think it's a bad idea. 498 00:25:02,000 --> 00:25:04,000 I mean, you'll get two forks anyway. 499 00:25:04,000 --> 00:25:06,000 You'll get two Bitcoins at the end of that anyway. 500 00:25:06,000 --> 00:25:08,000 And I'm pretty sure that everybody will just go 501 00:25:08,000 --> 00:25:10,000 with the one that doesn't add a tail subsidy. 502 00:25:10,000 --> 00:25:11,000 And then maybe in like 20 years, 503 00:25:11,000 --> 00:25:12,000 they'll come back and realize that was a mistake. 504 00:25:12,000 --> 00:25:14,000 But I don't think you'll ever get any support for it. 505 00:25:14,000 --> 00:25:18,000 And I think it's because when you bought Bitcoin 15 years ago, 506 00:25:18,000 --> 00:25:20,000 you were sold the idea of 21 million. 507 00:25:20,000 --> 00:25:22,000 You look around, you see 21 million 508 00:25:22,000 --> 00:25:23,000 all over the signage here. 509 00:25:23,000 --> 00:25:25,000 That's a big selling point of Bitcoin 510 00:25:25,000 --> 00:25:26,000 and you kind of destroy that. 511 00:25:26,000 --> 00:25:27,000 So I don't think it will ever happen 512 00:25:27,000 --> 00:25:30,000 and I would push against it. 513 00:25:30,000 --> 00:25:31,000 I agree. 514 00:25:31,000 --> 00:25:34,000 I don't think a tail emission is something 515 00:25:34,000 --> 00:25:36,000 that's part of the contract people signed up for 516 00:25:36,000 --> 00:25:37,000 when they bought Bitcoin. 517 00:25:37,000 --> 00:25:41,000 Everybody was sold on a 21 million hard cap forever. 518 00:25:41,000 --> 00:25:43,000 That's the entire premise of it. 519 00:25:43,000 --> 00:25:46,000 It is sound money, hard money, unchangeable. 520 00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:48,000 That's the bill we were all sold. 521 00:25:48,000 --> 00:25:50,000 If that changes, that could undermine 522 00:25:50,000 --> 00:25:53,000 the entire value proposition of Bitcoin itself 523 00:25:53,000 --> 00:25:55,000 as a hard money. 524 00:25:55,000 --> 00:25:58,000 Not to say if we don't do something, 525 00:25:58,000 --> 00:25:59,000 it may be inevitable. 526 00:25:59,000 --> 00:26:01,000 I don't know at what point it would be, 527 00:26:01,000 --> 00:26:03,000 but I mean, really? 528 00:26:03,000 --> 00:26:04,000 We're going to have to start taking 529 00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:06,000 some really hard looks, like I said, 530 00:26:06,000 --> 00:26:08,000 within the next six years. 531 00:26:08,000 --> 00:26:13,000 Because Monero's tail emission is at the rate 532 00:26:13,000 --> 00:26:15,000 that we will be for the subsidy in 10 years. 533 00:26:15,000 --> 00:26:17,000 So even if we freeze it there, 534 00:26:17,000 --> 00:26:18,000 it will be less than Monero 535 00:26:18,000 --> 00:26:21,000 and Monero is regularly 51% attacked. 536 00:26:21,000 --> 00:26:22,000 So obviously the tail emission 537 00:26:22,000 --> 00:26:24,000 is not enough for Monero. 538 00:26:24,000 --> 00:26:25,000 And this is good timing for that 539 00:26:25,000 --> 00:26:28,000 because we just had a Litecoin attack also. 540 00:26:28,000 --> 00:26:30,000 So all that is related to... 541 00:26:30,000 --> 00:26:31,000 For years, everyone has said, 542 00:26:31,000 --> 00:26:33,000 oh, don't worry about the security budget. 543 00:26:33,000 --> 00:26:35,000 But now all of us are being vindicated 544 00:26:35,000 --> 00:26:37,000 who brought it up. 545 00:26:37,000 --> 00:26:39,000 About tail emission, I think, 546 00:26:39,000 --> 00:26:41,000 you know, we just did a year of bike shedding 547 00:26:41,000 --> 00:26:46,000 over the optional configurable op return standardness 548 00:26:46,000 --> 00:26:48,000 byte parameter or something. 549 00:26:48,000 --> 00:26:49,000 So I completely agree with Nick 550 00:26:49,000 --> 00:26:51,000 that there would just be endless bike shedding 551 00:26:51,000 --> 00:26:54,000 and no one would ever be able to agree on that, I think. 552 00:26:54,000 --> 00:26:55,000 And I also agree with Mike 553 00:26:55,000 --> 00:26:59,000 that it wouldn't even solve the problem, really, I think. 554 00:26:59,000 --> 00:27:00,000 Gentlemen, thank you very much. 555 00:27:00,000 --> 00:27:02,000 Let's give it up for our panelists, y'all. 556 00:27:02,000 --> 00:27:03,000 Thank you, guys. 557 00:27:03,000 --> 00:27:04,000 Thank you. 558 00:27:08,000 --> 00:27:13,000 Every year, this community comes together 559 00:27:13,000 --> 00:27:17,000 to celebrate, to debate, 560 00:27:17,000 --> 00:27:21,000 to build what comes next. 561 00:27:21,000 --> 00:27:28,000 And every year, the stage gets bigger. 562 00:27:28,000 --> 00:27:31,000 Sound money, center stage. 563 00:27:31,000 --> 00:27:33,000 So where do you go to celebrate 564 00:27:33,000 --> 00:27:38,000 the next chapter in Bitcoin history? 565 00:27:38,000 --> 00:27:41,000 You come home. 566 00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:44,000 Nashville, July 2027.