1 00:00:01,431 --> 00:00:03,191 All right 2 00:00:03,191 --> 00:00:05,191 Let's get ready to rumble 3 00:00:05,551 --> 00:00:13,831 Getting joined by John Carvalho from synonym and Paul Sztorc Bitcoin developer to talk about Drivechains scaling 4 00:00:14,751 --> 00:00:18,991 Pass forward for scaling Bitcoin. I'll sit right here you to sit there 5 00:00:21,231 --> 00:00:23,151 Are they on 6 00:00:23,151 --> 00:00:29,351 So I think we start with you Paul. I think it's for people in the audience and people watching the live stream 7 00:00:29,351 --> 00:00:33,271 It makes sense to start with the history of Drivechains. What is a Drivechain? 8 00:00:33,271 --> 00:00:36,551 And how that's what this whole thing is about. They prepared a lot for this 9 00:00:39,351 --> 00:00:44,391 No, we did well because the preparation was so thorough drive was independently 10 00:00:44,911 --> 00:00:49,111 Made little notes of like things we agree and disagree about. Yeah, so 11 00:00:49,791 --> 00:00:52,391 But this is probably one of them. I mean, I don't know. This is an idea 12 00:00:52,391 --> 00:00:54,791 I had a long time ago to solve everyone's problems and 13 00:00:55,311 --> 00:01:00,111 The everyone included the large blockers and the small blockers and so both of the groups were like 14 00:01:00,191 --> 00:01:01,551 How can you side with them? 15 00:01:01,551 --> 00:01:04,031 And they they sort of didn't like the idea 16 00:01:04,031 --> 00:01:08,911 But it now it's the idea is so good that its merits are slowly being seen by everyone 17 00:01:09,271 --> 00:01:12,671 Seven years after I wrote about it in November 2015 18 00:01:13,791 --> 00:01:16,031 John do you agree that they're being seen by everybody? 19 00:01:17,151 --> 00:01:19,151 No, I 20 00:01:20,431 --> 00:01:22,431 Guess I'll be 21 00:01:22,471 --> 00:01:27,191 Dramatic and say I think pretty much all the narratives of Drivechain are false 22 00:01:27,911 --> 00:01:31,551 All right. All right. Let's do it then. All right, let's do it. We're rumbling 23 00:01:32,951 --> 00:01:38,111 So do you want me to just say a narrative or something? Sure. Like what do you think is the you know? 24 00:01:38,111 --> 00:01:40,831 the the biggest problem that Drivechain solve I 25 00:01:41,711 --> 00:01:47,991 Would say well, that's all quite a few but I'd say that the core problem is that people will never agree completely on 26 00:01:48,431 --> 00:01:54,071 What the blocks change should contain so you can't have the blocks be both large and small 27 00:01:54,191 --> 00:01:56,191 So no matter what you have someone has to go away 28 00:01:56,671 --> 00:02:02,911 Empty-handed and that is one of the problems. That's why I would a sidechain handle that problem better than a shit coin 29 00:02:03,631 --> 00:02:09,671 Because the with the shit coin you have a completely different investment. You have like a rival investment that has its own 30 00:02:10,551 --> 00:02:14,631 fate whereas this is just like kind of like converting cash to 31 00:02:15,431 --> 00:02:18,311 Money in a checking account or something they exchange at par 32 00:02:18,791 --> 00:02:25,511 That's the whole but I still have to convert my asset into the paradigm of a new blockchain, right? 33 00:02:26,671 --> 00:02:32,911 the yeah, it depends on exactly like there's like the details of what happens under the hood and then there's like what really so 34 00:02:33,271 --> 00:02:35,791 But yes, you you have two pieces of software 35 00:02:36,951 --> 00:02:39,631 They both can be blockchain software one has a large 36 00:02:40,151 --> 00:02:43,351 Larger block size for example, and when it's a smaller block size, for example 37 00:02:43,351 --> 00:02:48,191 And one of the things that we could do with this is shrink the layer one block size and then ossify 38 00:02:48,951 --> 00:02:50,951 But that's going on a slight tangent 39 00:02:52,591 --> 00:02:55,191 But the point is you have two completely different pieces of software and 40 00:02:55,951 --> 00:02:57,511 then you have 41 00:02:57,511 --> 00:03:03,071 You that you'd on the layer one you'd send coins you take coins that you own there and you'd send them into 42 00:03:03,591 --> 00:03:08,071 Layer two the the other piece of software, but the value 43 00:03:08,071 --> 00:03:13,351 I want to one right the value won't be one-to-one because the rules will be different on the separate blockchain 44 00:03:13,351 --> 00:03:18,871 The they exchange one-to-one in the software in the BIP300 rules when they go across 45 00:03:18,871 --> 00:03:21,751 so if you have four BTC and you 46 00:03:22,591 --> 00:03:26,391 send them across you end up with four coins and the other network and 47 00:03:26,831 --> 00:03:32,431 Then if you go through the long withdrawal process that is not intended for lay people to use 48 00:03:32,431 --> 00:03:35,131 But anyone can use it because it takes so long 49 00:03:35,671 --> 00:03:37,671 It's not intended for regular people to use 50 00:03:37,711 --> 00:03:42,871 But you can and if you do that and you have you still have 3.2 coins or something 51 00:03:42,871 --> 00:03:46,671 You will get 3.2 back on but on layer one 52 00:03:46,671 --> 00:03:52,951 so even whatever the market rate may be instantaneous, which may be different because of the delay the 53 00:03:54,311 --> 00:03:57,911 The BIP300 lets you send them at exactly a par 54 00:03:58,351 --> 00:03:59,511 but my 55 00:03:59,511 --> 00:04:02,431 my sidechain my side coin is 56 00:04:03,151 --> 00:04:06,391 Most likely going to have a different market value than Bitcoin, right? 57 00:04:06,391 --> 00:04:10,511 Well, it could be like point it could be like ninety nine point nine nine cents on the dollar or something 58 00:04:10,671 --> 00:04:14,151 Well wouldn't it could be anything totally different. And so how do you deal with it? 59 00:04:14,151 --> 00:04:18,151 What can never be above one right you can see why Robert you would move them in 60 00:04:18,151 --> 00:04:24,111 Yeah, there would be a delay on the arbitrage and there's more risk to using but moving them inside from layer one to layer two 61 00:04:24,111 --> 00:04:28,751 Is basically instantaneous. It's like it's like a ten minutes. There's one block or whatever 62 00:04:28,751 --> 00:04:32,431 So moving that out is 90 days moving them out is takes a very long time 63 00:04:33,151 --> 00:04:37,311 but so the question is there are certain situations where the 64 00:04:37,951 --> 00:04:43,651 Market value may not be like 99 cents on the dollar which include the sidechain developers 65 00:04:44,431 --> 00:04:50,031 Tried a terrible idea and the entire software has crashed and no one can figure out who the rightful owner of the coins is at all 66 00:04:50,351 --> 00:04:53,431 It's not possible to figure out all blockchains terrible ideas 67 00:04:53,431 --> 00:04:57,351 It's not a joke, it's not a joke including Bitcoin 68 00:04:57,831 --> 00:05:03,191 But Bitcoin is like Bitcoin and then blockchain is like pretending you can do other things in Bitcoin 69 00:05:03,191 --> 00:05:05,551 I think this may be another disagreement between the two of us 70 00:05:05,551 --> 00:05:11,111 Where do you really think is that hyperbole or do you really think that like every really like you don't see any value in like? 71 00:05:11,111 --> 00:05:13,111 the Zcash 72 00:05:13,351 --> 00:05:18,991 Technology even just as a mixer on bit even you stripped away of the the dev tax you stripped away the 73 00:05:19,551 --> 00:05:21,551 Weird weird stuff that Zuko does 74 00:05:22,111 --> 00:05:25,951 Each use case I could probably mention a specific reason 75 00:05:25,951 --> 00:05:31,151 But I think all of them have a reason where they are faulty designs ultimately and you think that's gonna be true 76 00:05:31,471 --> 00:05:34,911 Forever like no one will ever come up with a good idea. I think it's possible 77 00:05:34,911 --> 00:05:39,551 But I think that require kind of omniscience on your I don't think you need Drivechains to for that possibility 78 00:05:39,551 --> 00:05:40,911 Can I break in here? 79 00:05:40,911 --> 00:05:48,271 So you think these other ideas have faulty ideas what in your mind is like a good idea a secure idea in terms of? 80 00:05:49,311 --> 00:05:54,111 In other words, why what if somebody presented a blockchain that was like interesting 81 00:05:54,111 --> 00:05:57,551 What would it look like or why do you see Bitcoin being the only? 82 00:05:58,191 --> 00:06:00,191 valuable because like a 83 00:06:00,591 --> 00:06:08,111 blockchain has a specific purpose and solved like a specific problem and a lot of people want to attach this narrative that 84 00:06:08,191 --> 00:06:10,911 There are actually other things this format solves 85 00:06:10,951 --> 00:06:18,591 But they all root in the same thing that Bitcoin does and so ultimately a better Bitcoin would be like a simpler or you know 86 00:06:18,951 --> 00:06:24,011 More streamlined simpler Bitcoin and no all coins are really attempting to do that 87 00:06:24,071 --> 00:06:31,271 So they're all block chaining is just adding complexity to Bitcoin and adding attack area adding 88 00:06:31,431 --> 00:06:37,231 Centralization adding censorship in order to make a claim that a blockchain can do something that it can't actually do 89 00:06:37,951 --> 00:06:43,871 Bringing this back to Drivechain specifically. I think that's the biggest knock that I've heard historically on Drivechains is 90 00:06:44,471 --> 00:06:46,471 expanding this attack vector and 91 00:06:47,471 --> 00:06:52,991 Basically creating this incentive to bring insecurity to the chain via yeah 92 00:06:52,991 --> 00:06:59,551 I think that's just people who haven't really I mean, that's very forgivable that people say that but they just I don't think they really 93 00:06:59,911 --> 00:07:02,431 Understand what's happening, which is just on layer one 94 00:07:02,431 --> 00:07:06,651 There's just money like going into a box and then if enough hash rate accumulates on it 95 00:07:06,651 --> 00:07:09,531 You can take money out of the box to certain destination 96 00:07:09,531 --> 00:07:15,111 And so if you're relying on an external source of income, and I don't think either of those things are actually true 97 00:07:15,111 --> 00:07:22,271 I think they're actually both negatives where I think that one if there aren't enough fees for people to run Bitcoin 98 00:07:22,271 --> 00:07:24,511 It's because nobody's using Bitcoin and Bitcoin is dying 99 00:07:24,511 --> 00:07:31,191 It's not because we failed to add more features to Bitcoin. It's because people don't need any blockchain for anything and 100 00:07:31,831 --> 00:07:34,471 That's really unlikely. It is not the trend 101 00:07:34,471 --> 00:07:40,391 we have seen evidence in the past where you know, the blocks will get full eventually and the fees will be fine and 102 00:07:41,151 --> 00:07:46,751 Addressing whether or not there's enough fees for minors is mostly just you know 103 00:07:46,751 --> 00:07:51,031 How many blocks you want to wait to have a confirmation if there's not enough or mine yourself? 104 00:07:51,031 --> 00:07:57,371 But didn't you read the long article I wrote on exactly this topic which addressed both of those issues you have any short articles? 105 00:07:57,391 --> 00:07:58,551 No 106 00:07:58,551 --> 00:08:03,431 There's long, you know, it's like the too many notes from Amadeus. It's like there's long or short as I require 107 00:08:05,271 --> 00:08:07,031 So I wrote a long post about this though 108 00:08:07,031 --> 00:08:11,831 But it's like this is the and I wrote I made a long presentation on sidechain risks in 2016. So it's like 109 00:08:12,911 --> 00:08:16,431 we can get we'll get to something later maybe if we have time, but the 110 00:08:18,111 --> 00:08:22,751 The number of confirmations is not really relevant because the if the security budget is too low 111 00:08:22,791 --> 00:08:27,591 The attack is an endless campaign of 51% attacks. So that does that doesn't make any difference at all 112 00:08:27,591 --> 00:08:33,511 so the fees the second part so comes in the the issue the first part about 113 00:08:34,271 --> 00:08:36,271 The 114 00:08:37,111 --> 00:08:40,791 Fees can only be really really low if Bitcoin is failing for some reason 115 00:08:40,991 --> 00:08:42,871 First of all, I could be failing for some reason 116 00:08:42,871 --> 00:08:45,031 But second of all as I say in the post 117 00:08:45,071 --> 00:08:51,551 there's plenty of things that people really like that the market clearing price is very low for and so I give examples like a 118 00:08:51,831 --> 00:08:52,951 paywalled 119 00:08:52,951 --> 00:08:56,711 News article or music you can just go on YouTube and type music 120 00:08:56,871 --> 00:09:02,311 Whatever music you like into YouTube and you get it for free. So the market clearing price is very very very low 121 00:09:02,671 --> 00:09:06,831 But people love music, you know, people really like music just because and people really like water 122 00:09:06,831 --> 00:09:13,231 I have water in the article like people love water, but water is cheap because the supply is abundant 123 00:09:13,231 --> 00:09:19,071 So and this so this is a situation where just because something is really really any of this has to do with Bitcoin 124 00:09:24,071 --> 00:09:27,351 You can like something and the market clearing price will be low 125 00:09:28,271 --> 00:09:30,271 Factors the supply and demand 126 00:09:30,631 --> 00:09:35,071 Responsible for all the things that you like. It is just there to be an abstraction for value 127 00:09:35,071 --> 00:09:39,871 No, this is nothing to do with what bitcoins responsible for. I'm just telling you that so the other thing 128 00:09:39,871 --> 00:09:45,511 I took in the post is I do the empirical and theoretical case for the slow the low fees 129 00:09:45,711 --> 00:09:47,991 Which is that the empirical case is very dire 130 00:09:48,231 --> 00:09:55,351 The the fees will go up sometimes when there's a big bull market and the blocks get congested temporarily 131 00:09:55,631 --> 00:09:58,031 But then the bull market goes away 132 00:09:58,671 --> 00:10:04,791 And even if the price goes up by a factor of 50 and stays up the the fees will go back down 133 00:10:05,391 --> 00:10:12,671 To less than $1 per transaction. And so they they stay very low that people are not willing to pay the fees 134 00:10:12,671 --> 00:10:18,071 I think you're trying to predict the future and but the case for sidechains is not built on on this in particular 135 00:10:18,071 --> 00:10:24,751 This was just because people started talking about this issue and I did the math and I realized how horrible the situation was 136 00:10:24,751 --> 00:10:30,751 So I thought I would write about it since everyone has such vast misunderstandings about this issue which include that more confirmations 137 00:10:31,471 --> 00:10:33,351 Make any difference at all, which they do not 138 00:10:33,351 --> 00:10:39,111 I could just a saint change the assumption to say that the demand for block space is infinite and the only reason it doesn't that's 139 00:10:39,111 --> 00:10:42,271 Not apparent is that there are actual costs to using it 140 00:10:42,271 --> 00:10:48,111 And so I think the demand will eventually hit you could you could say but it depends on what? 141 00:10:48,111 --> 00:10:52,511 What the audience will buy if they really buy that the demand for block space is infinite 142 00:10:52,551 --> 00:10:54,551 I think what they should buy either of us 143 00:10:54,551 --> 00:11:00,151 are quite a few more other things to be explained like why you can buy an entire block these days for 144 00:11:01,631 --> 00:11:03,631 Call it 145 00:11:03,871 --> 00:11:05,791 $1,500 or something then 146 00:11:05,791 --> 00:11:07,791 It's not infinite. So 147 00:11:08,231 --> 00:11:11,351 Instead of a bike shedding this further like in the end 148 00:11:11,351 --> 00:11:16,471 I think the audience should just say neither of us can actually predict the future and so but all of this is theoretical 149 00:11:16,511 --> 00:11:20,231 But the second half of what I mentioned is also important 150 00:11:20,231 --> 00:11:27,191 Which is you portray the idea that miners relying on sidechains for incomes to some degree as good 151 00:11:27,191 --> 00:11:30,071 I actually think it's bad because like for example 152 00:11:30,071 --> 00:11:35,311 what if you take what if a sidechain becomes more valuable than Bitcoin or what it and what if 153 00:11:35,551 --> 00:11:38,991 Becomes the majority of coin becomes more valuable than Bitcoin, you know 154 00:11:39,551 --> 00:11:44,351 Do you think that would be an existential threat? Do you think all coins compete with Bitcoin or they help Bitcoin? 155 00:11:45,271 --> 00:11:48,351 Do I think all coins I think every rival investment 156 00:11:49,231 --> 00:11:55,311 Anything you could put your money in is a rival investment to Bitcoin. So I think they're particularly abstracted monies, right? 157 00:11:55,311 --> 00:12:01,511 Yes, there's no differentiation. It's the same the competing to do the same thing. They're kind of all flavors of money 158 00:12:01,511 --> 00:12:06,071 Yes, I agree. So you want to put a bunch of competing monies on Bitcoin? 159 00:12:06,631 --> 00:12:09,831 No, the sidechain is not a competitor because they exchange a par 160 00:12:10,231 --> 00:12:14,111 Why would they exchange a par if they had different quality their software exchanges them at par 161 00:12:15,191 --> 00:12:19,111 If they do it, but why would I why would I value a bit like why it's saying? 162 00:12:19,111 --> 00:12:24,191 Why would you put $20 bill into an ATM and you say why did I get $20 into my checking because the risk of the 163 00:12:24,191 --> 00:12:25,711 Designs are going to be much higher 164 00:12:25,711 --> 00:12:29,471 So the values are going to be lower like if I go to Z kept bit Zcash 165 00:12:29,711 --> 00:12:33,231 Then there's gonna be a whole different design to how that blockchain works. Yes, right 166 00:12:33,231 --> 00:12:37,471 But that affects only the people who opt in to that. Why would I think that is lower? 167 00:12:37,951 --> 00:12:41,071 Lower sorry, why would I opt in if the value is lower? 168 00:12:41,711 --> 00:12:42,991 know that 169 00:12:42,991 --> 00:12:49,631 The value may be lower than by a trivial amount that reflects the the inconvenience of coming back slowly 170 00:12:50,031 --> 00:12:51,911 So but if you but yeah 171 00:12:51,911 --> 00:12:57,391 The sidechain situation is designed for something where there's a feature that people want it has to be a popular feature 172 00:12:57,391 --> 00:13:03,591 So if there's no reason but you would use the Zcash sidechain because it's a vastly superior mixer than everything that exists today 173 00:13:03,831 --> 00:13:08,511 It's vastly superior than all coin join or whatever requires a trusted setup still right? 174 00:13:08,751 --> 00:13:11,591 Sorry Zcash requires a trusted setup, right? 175 00:13:11,591 --> 00:13:11,831 No 176 00:13:11,831 --> 00:13:17,351 But we the Zcash sidechain that we built is just a carbon copy of the so we copied the same set 177 00:13:17,351 --> 00:13:21,071 But actually they changed the upgraded from four to five and I may be wrong, but I think 178 00:13:21,711 --> 00:13:23,431 Zcash five 179 00:13:23,431 --> 00:13:26,191 Doesn't have the trusted setup, although I'm not a Zcash expert 180 00:13:26,191 --> 00:13:31,951 But I do know that we upgraded the sidechain after they spent a year and a half going from Zcash 181 00:13:32,111 --> 00:13:37,231 4 to Zcash 5 in about a weekend. We moved the sidechain from I 182 00:13:37,791 --> 00:13:42,351 Don't know copying Zcash 4 to Zcash 5. Yeah, so I think they got rid of the trusted setup 183 00:13:42,511 --> 00:13:46,391 I'll say I don't know who is a cash, but I'll mention like I it doesn't matter though 184 00:13:46,391 --> 00:13:49,471 There's no we there's no way that everyone can keep track of all these ideas 185 00:13:49,991 --> 00:13:53,871 Because everyone has all these ideas some will be good and some will be bad and it's up to you 186 00:13:53,871 --> 00:13:59,071 The you the customer should have them all at your fingertips and there's no way that we can keep track of all these ideas 187 00:13:59,111 --> 00:14:06,991 I'm worried about that suppose that a large amount of Bitcoin ends up in a sidechain and that sidechain becomes a majority of 188 00:14:06,991 --> 00:14:12,231 The Bitcoin to me this case is analogous to something else becoming more popular than Bitcoin 189 00:14:12,871 --> 00:14:17,351 So in that case the Bitcoin faces an existential threat and may be destroyed 190 00:14:17,351 --> 00:14:21,151 I think right, but if you put it on at least it's the sidechains are always 191 00:14:21,791 --> 00:14:23,051 subordinate to 192 00:14:23,051 --> 00:14:26,051 The sidechains are always subordinate to to Bitcoin they can't if you run the sidechain software that we have 193 00:14:26,051 --> 00:14:27,051 They're subordinate to miners 194 00:14:27,051 --> 00:14:33,051 No, if you run the sidechain software that we have if it cannot find a layer one node to connect to it just won't do anything 195 00:14:33,051 --> 00:14:36,051 So it cannot exist without layer one so they're very subordinate 196 00:14:36,051 --> 00:14:43,051 Right, but what like isn't this sort of like a way to hard fork Bitcoin like if I put all the Bitcoin in a sidechain 197 00:14:43,051 --> 00:14:47,051 No, it's because the sidechains are optional and ignorable that it's not a hard fork 198 00:14:47,051 --> 00:14:53,051 But it gives you all the freedom of the hard fork with just this tiny assumption that one TXID 199 00:14:53,051 --> 00:14:58,051 That's acted by the miners every six three six months will be accurate 200 00:14:58,051 --> 00:15:02,051 And even if that doesn't work it only affects the people who put money over there 201 00:15:02,051 --> 00:15:08,051 Yeah, I don't think it can only affect the people in the sidechain because miners also mine Bitcoin 202 00:15:08,051 --> 00:15:13,051 And once you change the incentives for miners caring about external supplemental income 203 00:15:14,051 --> 00:15:18,051 Let me ask you this, what should they care about instead? 204 00:15:18,051 --> 00:15:19,051 What's that? 205 00:15:19,051 --> 00:15:25,051 So like I have a little graph with a little triangle and the article that you didn't read about the security budget at the bottom 206 00:15:25,051 --> 00:15:27,051 I'm sure I read it and forgot it years ago 207 00:15:27,051 --> 00:15:35,051 The fees are persistently low then you know because we have Peter Todd has said that he advocates this tail emission concept 208 00:15:35,051 --> 00:15:36,051 So violating the 21 million coin limit 209 00:15:36,051 --> 00:15:37,051 I don't know 210 00:15:37,051 --> 00:15:38,051 You don't agree with that right? 211 00:15:38,051 --> 00:15:46,051 So the triangle has 21 million coin limit or enormous block size increases or greater than 51% of the revenues come from merge mining 212 00:15:46,051 --> 00:15:51,051 And you know that we've been doing merge mining already for many years like Satoshi invented merge mining 213 00:15:51,051 --> 00:15:53,051 This is not like a BIP300 idea 214 00:15:53,051 --> 00:15:55,051 BIP300 has nothing to do with merge mining 215 00:15:55,051 --> 00:15:56,051 It was invented by Satoshi in 2010 216 00:15:56,051 --> 00:15:58,051 We've been doing it with Namecoin for a long time 217 00:15:58,051 --> 00:16:00,051 Let me ask you this, do you think Namecoin is a good idea? 218 00:16:00,051 --> 00:16:01,051 Also invented by Satoshi 219 00:16:01,051 --> 00:16:02,051 So you think it's just not a good idea? 220 00:16:02,051 --> 00:16:04,051 You don't need a blockchain for that at all 221 00:16:04,051 --> 00:16:05,051 Really? 222 00:16:05,051 --> 00:16:07,051 Oh because you have Synonym I forgot about this 223 00:16:08,051 --> 00:16:09,051 He's doing this 224 00:16:09,051 --> 00:16:11,051 But I don't think that Synonym is 225 00:16:11,051 --> 00:16:12,051 I don't want to turn this 226 00:16:12,051 --> 00:16:14,051 I don't want to go completely off topic 227 00:16:14,051 --> 00:16:18,051 But with Synonym you have to like pick like who you think is going to be the name provider or something 228 00:16:18,051 --> 00:16:19,051 Get a whole list 229 00:16:19,051 --> 00:16:22,051 You can't like own google.com in Synonym right? 230 00:16:22,051 --> 00:16:25,051 So as like a dynamic primitive 231 00:16:25,051 --> 00:16:26,051 Names are mutual 232 00:16:26,051 --> 00:16:27,051 They're not assigned 233 00:16:27,051 --> 00:16:31,051 And so in other words we both have to agree on what a name is when we're pointing to something 234 00:16:31,051 --> 00:16:33,051 Yeah I can't just own google.com and say 235 00:16:34,051 --> 00:16:36,051 Nobody actually owns google.com 236 00:16:36,051 --> 00:16:38,051 I have a property right on google.com and whatever you think about it I don't 237 00:16:38,051 --> 00:16:39,051 No one cares 238 00:16:39,051 --> 00:16:40,051 So I think that 239 00:16:40,051 --> 00:16:42,051 I think people would prefer the property right personally 240 00:16:42,051 --> 00:16:44,051 And that's what I think Satoshi thought as well 241 00:16:44,051 --> 00:16:45,051 When he invented Namecoin 242 00:16:45,051 --> 00:16:47,051 Co-invented Namecoin in 2010 243 00:16:47,051 --> 00:16:49,051 But putting a domain name on Namecoin 244 00:16:49,051 --> 00:16:52,051 Doesn't prevent somebody else from having that domain name in another index 245 00:16:52,051 --> 00:16:54,051 Yeah I agree but it's a question of 246 00:16:54,051 --> 00:16:56,051 Does it solve a problem for the actual user? 247 00:16:56,051 --> 00:16:57,051 I think people 248 00:16:57,051 --> 00:16:58,051 Only if that user 249 00:16:58,051 --> 00:16:59,051 The dark net market 250 00:16:59,051 --> 00:17:00,051 Onion link 251 00:17:00,051 --> 00:17:02,051 And they get phishing and stuff 252 00:17:02,051 --> 00:17:04,051 That's one of the actual problems in the real world 253 00:17:04,051 --> 00:17:06,051 That Namecoin would solve 254 00:17:06,051 --> 00:17:08,051 And that other things would solve 255 00:17:08,051 --> 00:17:10,051 Even if you just stamped out the so called horizontal scaling 256 00:17:10,051 --> 00:17:12,051 Just stamped out copies of Bitcoin core 257 00:17:12,051 --> 00:17:18,051 You just don't need a blockchain to establish a list of domains 258 00:17:18,051 --> 00:17:20,051 That only attribute to certain endpoints 259 00:17:20,051 --> 00:17:23,051 And your reaction to the idea that 260 00:17:23,051 --> 00:17:24,051 So like Ethereum 261 00:17:24,051 --> 00:17:26,051 The transaction fees 262 00:17:28,051 --> 00:17:30,051 To me those represent paying customers 263 00:17:30,051 --> 00:17:32,051 And so when it goes from one one thousandth 264 00:17:32,051 --> 00:17:35,051 Of Bitcoin's value in 2015 265 00:17:35,051 --> 00:17:37,051 To over a hundred times 266 00:17:37,051 --> 00:17:39,051 And basically a straight line on a log chart 267 00:17:39,051 --> 00:17:41,051 To you that doesn't mean anything at all 268 00:17:41,051 --> 00:17:45,051 So can I just use the transaction fees of Visa to compare to Bitcoin? 269 00:17:45,051 --> 00:17:47,051 I'm saying that those are paying users 270 00:17:47,051 --> 00:17:49,051 They're paying to use a blockchain 271 00:17:49,051 --> 00:17:50,051 People pay for Visa too 272 00:17:50,051 --> 00:17:52,051 What's the difference between Visa and Ethereum? 273 00:17:52,051 --> 00:17:54,051 Well in this case 274 00:17:54,051 --> 00:17:56,051 In this particular context of my question 275 00:17:56,051 --> 00:17:57,051 There is no difference 276 00:17:57,051 --> 00:17:59,051 Because I'm just saying this is a customer that wants something 277 00:17:59,051 --> 00:18:01,051 But I'm saying that the Ethereum wants 278 00:18:01,051 --> 00:18:03,051 If a customer wants something that's not Bitcoin 279 00:18:03,051 --> 00:18:05,051 Let's not talk over each other gentlemen 280 00:18:05,051 --> 00:18:07,051 Ethereum is a blockchain in this case 281 00:18:07,051 --> 00:18:11,051 And more directly a competitor to Bitcoin than Visa is I would say 282 00:18:11,051 --> 00:18:12,051 Wouldn't you? 283 00:18:12,051 --> 00:18:14,051 My point is that Ethereum 284 00:18:14,051 --> 00:18:18,051 It requires the assumption of a censorable centralized blockchain 285 00:18:18,051 --> 00:18:19,051 In order to have an Ethereum 286 00:18:19,051 --> 00:18:21,051 You need to be censorable and centralized 287 00:18:21,051 --> 00:18:24,051 And so what's the difference between that and MasterCard or Visa? 288 00:18:24,051 --> 00:18:26,051 I don't think it's black and white 289 00:18:26,051 --> 00:18:30,051 You think it's exactly the same like MasterCard and Ethereum 290 00:18:30,051 --> 00:18:34,051 As far as how easy it is to just like call them up on the phone 291 00:18:34,051 --> 00:18:36,051 And say take this person's money? 292 00:18:36,051 --> 00:18:37,051 I think 293 00:18:37,051 --> 00:18:38,051 You have private keys 294 00:18:38,051 --> 00:18:39,051 At the same scale yeah 295 00:18:39,051 --> 00:18:40,051 Ethereum you have key pairs right? 296 00:18:40,051 --> 00:18:42,051 You have addresses 297 00:18:42,051 --> 00:18:45,051 So I think there's much more of a spectrum than you might think 298 00:18:45,051 --> 00:18:48,051 I think the closer Ethereum gets to the size or scale 299 00:18:48,051 --> 00:18:50,051 And amount of customers as MasterCard 300 00:18:50,051 --> 00:18:53,051 They will be one to one that censorable 301 00:18:54,051 --> 00:18:55,051 I mean I don't know about that 302 00:18:55,051 --> 00:18:58,051 Because you don't have your own key pair with MasterCard you know 303 00:18:58,051 --> 00:19:00,051 There's no customer service 304 00:19:00,051 --> 00:19:02,051 Maybe there will be a customer service number for ETH in the future 305 00:19:02,051 --> 00:19:03,051 That would be funny 306 00:19:03,051 --> 00:19:05,051 That would be something 307 00:19:05,051 --> 00:19:07,051 This is my whole thing about blockchains 308 00:19:07,051 --> 00:19:10,051 Is they all require accepting the prerequisite 309 00:19:10,051 --> 00:19:12,051 Of a censorable blockchain 310 00:19:12,051 --> 00:19:14,051 A broken blockchain at scale 311 00:19:15,051 --> 00:19:17,051 But that doesn't apply to Bitcoin at all or something 312 00:19:17,051 --> 00:19:20,051 Like what if the Zcash sidechain had a very small block size 313 00:19:20,051 --> 00:19:24,051 So that's even easier to run the Zcash node than the Bitcoin node 314 00:19:24,051 --> 00:19:27,051 That's the hang up for you or what? 315 00:19:27,051 --> 00:19:29,051 I don't know that 316 00:19:29,051 --> 00:19:31,051 If there's something that's worth doing on Bitcoin 317 00:19:31,051 --> 00:19:33,051 It's worth doing on Bitcoin 318 00:19:33,051 --> 00:19:36,051 And if it requires some sort of other blockchain to do it 319 00:19:36,051 --> 00:19:38,051 It's just probably not worth doing 320 00:19:38,051 --> 00:19:40,051 Well I think this brings me to this other idea 321 00:19:40,051 --> 00:19:41,051 That I wanted to try to mention 322 00:19:41,051 --> 00:19:43,051 Which is that I think that we 323 00:19:43,051 --> 00:19:45,051 We do disagree on something else 324 00:19:45,051 --> 00:19:49,051 Which is that the freedom to ignore good ideas 325 00:19:49,051 --> 00:19:51,051 Which is that you 326 00:19:51,051 --> 00:19:54,051 I think you claim it in every case 327 00:19:54,051 --> 00:19:58,051 You say I don't have to pay attention to this idea if I want 328 00:19:58,051 --> 00:20:01,051 No one should change Bitcoin 329 00:20:01,051 --> 00:20:05,051 Unless they can prove to me that this idea is good 330 00:20:05,051 --> 00:20:07,051 And I can just choose to ignore it 331 00:20:07,051 --> 00:20:11,051 And I say if you try to claim that always 332 00:20:11,051 --> 00:20:15,051 Then you actually have to allow people to shitcoin I think 333 00:20:16,051 --> 00:20:19,051 Think of like a Ricardo Monero situation 334 00:20:19,051 --> 00:20:22,051 Where he has this ring signature idea back in the day 335 00:20:22,051 --> 00:20:24,051 As you know, a long time ago 336 00:20:24,051 --> 00:20:26,051 And then it was kind of like what was he supposed to do instead? 337 00:20:26,051 --> 00:20:28,051 Like just nothing? 338 00:20:28,051 --> 00:20:29,051 And then he created Monero 339 00:20:29,051 --> 00:20:31,051 So I think only when we have sidechains 340 00:20:31,051 --> 00:20:33,051 And there's no need to shitcoin 341 00:20:33,051 --> 00:20:34,051 Can you go back to ignoring 342 00:20:34,051 --> 00:20:36,051 Say I'm just going to ignore all these ideas 343 00:20:36,051 --> 00:20:38,051 Otherwise you have to pick one of the three 344 00:20:38,051 --> 00:20:41,051 You either have to say I'm going to research every single idea that exists 345 00:20:41,051 --> 00:20:44,051 And have a fully informed opinion on it 346 00:20:44,051 --> 00:20:45,051 Which I think is impossible 347 00:20:45,051 --> 00:20:47,051 Or you have to say we'll let people shitcoin 348 00:20:47,051 --> 00:20:48,051 Or you have to say 349 00:20:48,051 --> 00:20:50,051 I don't quite look at it that way 350 00:20:50,051 --> 00:20:53,051 I'm not saying that somebody can't come up with a good idea 351 00:20:53,051 --> 00:20:55,051 I'm saying that 352 00:20:55,051 --> 00:20:58,051 Nobody has shown me a good idea 353 00:20:58,051 --> 00:21:04,051 So that's a pretty good way to justify my general disinterest 354 00:21:04,051 --> 00:21:08,051 And disinterest in accepting risk on Bitcoin to enable this 355 00:21:08,051 --> 00:21:10,051 Well let me ask you this though 356 00:21:10,051 --> 00:21:11,051 You think an idea isn't good 357 00:21:11,051 --> 00:21:13,051 This is why I brought up the Ethereum fees 358 00:21:13,051 --> 00:21:16,051 Because maybe you say that you don't think an idea is good 359 00:21:16,051 --> 00:21:19,051 But shouldn't it be up to each individual user 360 00:21:19,051 --> 00:21:21,051 To decide what they think is a good idea 361 00:21:21,051 --> 00:21:23,051 They're allowed to sell their Bitcoin for fiat 362 00:21:23,051 --> 00:21:26,051 They're allowed to sell their Bitcoin for goods and services 363 00:21:26,051 --> 00:21:29,051 They can buy Solana if they want 364 00:21:29,051 --> 00:21:33,051 So shouldn't they decide, not you, what ideas are good? 365 00:21:33,051 --> 00:21:36,051 Like I said, I don't think Bitcoin is responsible for all things 366 00:21:36,051 --> 00:21:39,051 So if you think something else serves as a use case for you 367 00:21:39,051 --> 00:21:41,051 Use something else 368 00:21:41,051 --> 00:21:44,051 Gentlemen, our time is up 369 00:21:44,051 --> 00:21:46,051 Okay, flew by 370 00:21:46,051 --> 00:21:47,051 I do want to commend you 371 00:21:47,051 --> 00:21:49,051 I think it is important to make the point 372 00:21:49,051 --> 00:21:51,051 This is a very civil discussion 373 00:21:51,051 --> 00:21:53,051 Obviously you guys agree and disagree on some stuff 374 00:21:53,051 --> 00:21:55,051 But I like this format, Max 375 00:21:55,051 --> 00:21:59,051 And I think it's good to have cordial, civil conversations like this 376 00:21:59,051 --> 00:22:00,051 So I want to thank you 377 00:22:00,051 --> 00:22:02,051 I like Paul, for the record 378 00:22:02,051 --> 00:22:03,051 I also like John 379 00:22:03,051 --> 00:22:05,051 He introduced us so well 380 00:22:05,051 --> 00:22:07,051 But I was going to sit down and say 381 00:22:07,051 --> 00:22:08,051 We meet again 382 00:22:08,051 --> 00:22:09,051 Or something very ominous 383 00:22:09,051 --> 00:22:10,051 But I never got to say it 384 00:22:10,051 --> 00:22:12,051 Alright, well gentlemen, thank you 385 00:22:12,051 --> 00:22:13,051 It was a fascinating discussion 386 00:22:13,051 --> 00:22:15,051 Thank you, thanks Paul 387 00:22:15,051 --> 00:22:17,051 Guys, we've got Matthew Mazincus coming up next 388 00:22:17,051 --> 00:22:19,051 I saw the presentation, it's really good 389 00:22:19,051 --> 00:22:20,051 I would stick around 390 00:22:20,051 --> 00:22:21,051 Alright, thank you gents 391 00:22:21,051 --> 00:22:23,051 That was a fascinating discussion 392 00:22:23,051 --> 00:22:26,051 Our next talk, our speaker 393 00:22:26,051 --> 00:22:30,000 He is the host and founder of Porcopolis Economics